切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版) ›› 2019, Vol. 14 ›› Issue (06) : 471 -474. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-9450.2019.06.016

所属专题: 文献

护理园地

手术室护理自查模式干预对患者感染、护理质量及效果的影响
陈洁1, 窦梦娇2, 王新宇3, 李美佳3, 白洁4, 李瑞博5,()   
  1. 1. 100088 北京,火箭军特色医学中心质量管理科
    2. 100142 北京,空军特色医学中心麻醉科
    3. 434023 荆州,长江大学医学部
    4. 100088 北京,火箭军特色医学中心呼吸内科
    5. 100088 北京,火箭军特色医学中心护理部
  • 收稿日期:2019-09-24 出版日期:2019-12-01
  • 通信作者: 李瑞博

Influence of nursing self-examination model intervention on patient infection, nursing quality and effect in operating room

Jie Chen1, Mengjiao Dou2, Xinyu Wang3, Meijia Li3, Jie Bai4, Ruibo Li5,()   

  1. 1. Department of Quality Management,
    2. Department of Anesthesia, Air Force Characteristic Medical Center of PLA, Beijing 100142, China
    3. Department of Medicine, Yangtze Univercity, Jingzhou 434023, China
    4. Department of Respiratory Medicine,
    5. Department of Nursing, Rocket Force Characteristic Medical Center of PLA, Beijing 100088, China
  • Received:2019-09-24 Published:2019-12-01
  • Corresponding author: Ruibo Li
  • About author:
    Corresponding auther: Li Ruibo, Email:
引用本文:

陈洁, 窦梦娇, 王新宇, 李美佳, 白洁, 李瑞博. 手术室护理自查模式干预对患者感染、护理质量及效果的影响[J]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2019, 14(06): 471-474.

Jie Chen, Mengjiao Dou, Xinyu Wang, Meijia Li, Jie Bai, Ruibo Li. Influence of nursing self-examination model intervention on patient infection, nursing quality and effect in operating room[J]. Chinese Journal of Injury Repair and Wound Healing(Electronic Edition), 2019, 14(06): 471-474.

目的

回顾性分析手术室护理自查模式干预对患者感染的作用及护理质量和效果的影响。

方法

选取2017年1月至2017年12月火箭军特色医学中心收治的接受手术治疗的患者80例,采用常规护理干预模式,包括指标监测、病情观察及心理护理等,设为对照组。选取2018年2月至2019年1月火箭军特色医学中心收治的接受手术治疗的患者80例,在常规护理干预模式基础上采用手术室护理自查模式干预,即坚持以患者为中心的护理工作理念,预测分析手术室护理的风险问题和等级,护理人员依据术前评估结果协助医师开展手术,设为研究组。比较2组患者感染发生情况、护理人员的综合能力及患者的护理满意度。数据比较采用t检验、χ2检验或Fisher确切概率法检验。

结果

研究组患者感染率为12.50%(10/80),少于对照组[27.50%(22/80)],差异有统计学意义(χ2=5.625,P=0.018)。研究组患者的基础护理、病情观察、心理护理、并发症预防和护理记录5项综合能力评分分别为(95.5±3.7)、(94.6±1.4)、(96.0±2.3)、(94.1±2.7)、(95.8±2.5)分,均高于对照组[(89.5±4.2)、(90.6±3.7)、(91.2±4.5)、(89.7±3.7)、(91.5±2.8)分],差异均有统计学意义(t=10.684、11.368、12.564、10.958、11.524,P=0.030、0.028、0.025、0.029、0.028)。研究组患者护理满意度为92.50%(74/80),高于对照组[77.50%(62/80)],差异有统计学意义(χ2=7.059,P=0.008)。

结论

手术室护理中采取护理自查模式,能够有效降低改善医院感染率,改善护理质量,提升患者的护理满意度。

Objective

To retrospectively analyze the influence of nursing self-examination model intervention on patient infection, nursing quality and effect in operating room.

Methods

Eighty patients of surgical treatment patients admitted to Rocket Force Characteristic Medical Centerof PLA from January 2017 to December 2017 were selected with the routine nursing intervention model, including index monitoring, condition observation and psychological nursing, who were adopted as the control group. Eighty patients admitted to Rocket Force Characteristic Medical Centerof PLA from February 2018 to January 2019 were selected with self-examination mode intervention based on the routine nursing intervention model, adhering to the patient as the center of the nursing concept, predicting the risk of analysis of the operating room nursing problems and grades, nursing staff according to the results of preoperative evaluation, assisting physicians in surgery, who were adopted as the experimental group. The situation of nosocomial infection, the comprehensive ability of nursing staff and the satisfaction of nursing were compared between the two groups. Data were processed with t test, chi-square test or Fisher exact probability test.

Results

The nosocomial infection rate in the experimental group was 12.50%(10/80), which was higher than that of the control group [27.50%(22/80)], and the differences were statistically significant (χ2=5.625, P=0.018). The scores of basic nursing, condition observation, psychological care, complications prevention and nursing records in the experimental group were (95.5±3.7), (94.6±1.4), (96.0±2.3), (94.1±2.7), (95.8±2.5) points, which were higher than those in the control group[(89.5±4.2), (90.6±3.7), (91.2±4.5), (89.7±3.7), (91.5±2.8) points], and the difference was statistically significant(t=10.684, 11.368, 12.564, 10.958, 11.524; P=0.030, 0.028, 0.025, 0.029, 0.028). The nursing satisfaction of patients in the experimental group was 92.50%(74/80), which was higher than that of the control group [77.50%(62/80)], and the difference was statistically significant (χ2=7.059, P=0.008).

Conclusion

Nursing self-examination model in operating room can effectively reduce the nosocomial infection rate, improve the quality of nursing and improve the nursing satisfaction of patients.

表1 2组接受手术治疗患者的感染发生情况比较[例(%)]
表2 护理人员的综合能力评分比较(分,±s)
表3 2组接受手术治疗的患者的护理满意度比较[例(%)]
[1]
钟伟华. 安全隐患自查模式在手术室护理风险管理中的应用[J]. 检验医学与临床,2017, 14(A02): 117-119.
[2]
杨倩. 探讨质量控制小组管理模式在手术室护理管理中的应用[J]. 实用临床医药杂志,2017, 10(2): 126-128.
[3]
任玲爱,戴靖华,吴春梅. 基于服务质量差距模型的手术室护理工作质量及医护配合现状调查分析[J]. 中国药物与临床,2018, 18(2): 216-218.
[4]
Temime L, Cohen N, Ait-Bouziad K, et al. Impact of a multicomponent hand hygiene-related intervention on the infectious risk in nursing homes: A cluster randomized trial[J]. AmJ Infect Control, 2018, 46(2): 173-179.
[5]
郝凤杰,金凤,李培亮,等. 手术室护士感知的护理工作环境与工作家庭冲突的关系分析[J]. 护理管理杂志,2017, 11(5): 20-22.
[6]
何艳,白玲. 护理风险紧急预案与手术室护理整体质量的相关研究[J]. 实用临床医药杂志,2018, 22(20): 137-139.
[7]
徐华,王翠平,徐鹏. 手术室综合护理对预防胃肠道手术切口感染的效果观察[J]. 现代消化及介入诊疗,2017, 10(2): 156-158.
[8]
Rosenthal VD, Desse J, Maurizi DM, et al. Impact of the International Nosocomial Infection Control Consortium′s multidimensional approach on rates of ventilator-associated pneumonia in 14 intensive care units in 11 hospitals of 5 cities within Argentina[J]. Am J Infect Control, 2018, 39(4): 445-451.
[9]
钟奕,张军花,卜文君,等. 应用微信公众号管理手术室辅助人员手卫生对预防医院感染的影响[J]. 中华医院感染学杂志,2017, 27(23): 164-166.
[10]
严文萍,郝晶,金娜,等. 手术室优质护理预防重症患者术后感染及预后的影响研究[J].实用临床医药杂志,2017, 11(16): 164-165.
[11]
闫霞. 综合护理在手术室外科伤口感染预防中的临床探讨[J]. 山西医药杂志,2018, 47(15): 104-106.
[12]
郭瑞萍,秦红英,黄米娜,等. 手术室感染控制策略对术后感染及手术室空气洁净度的影响研究[J]. 中华医院感染学杂志,2017, 27(23): 5484-5486.
[13]
Wei X, Zhang Z, Walley JD, et al. Effect of a training and educational intervention for physicians and caregivers on antibiotic prescribing for upper respiratory tract infections in children at primary care facilities in rural China: a cluster-randomised controlled trial[J]. Lancet Global Health, 2017, 5(12): e1258.
[14]
张麦玲,李艳华,朱小芳,等. 外科手术患者发生切口感染的手术室相关因素分析及防治策略[J]. 中华医院感染学杂志,2018, 12(1): 122-125.
[15]
张婷,郝晶,王敏蓉,等. PDCA循环联合细节护理在手术室医院感染控制中的应用效果[J]. 检验医学与临床,2018, 15(10): 132-135.
[16]
白雪玲,王元,江燕华,等. SHEL模式在手术物品清点安全管理中的应用[J]. 中华医院管理杂志,2013, 29(9): 664-665.
[17]
王军霞,王维利,洪静芳,等. 护理管理者共情能力与领导力相关性研究[J]. 中华医院管理杂志,2013, 29(7): 521-524.
[18]
王俐稔,蒋红,韦英. JCI手术安全标准在护理管理中的应用研究[J]. 中华医院管理杂志,2012, 28(8): 620-622.
[19]
孙燕,郑一宁. 从医院评审探讨护理管理思路[J]. 中华医院管理杂志,2004, 20(1): 9-11.
[20]
苏兰若,郑瑾,王爱平,等. 11个省市1004名护理管理者岗前培训需求调查[J]. 中华医院管理杂志,2006, 22(2): 130-132.
[1] 熊倩, 罗凤. 乳腺癌患者术后康复现状与对策的研究进展[J]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 372-374.
[2] 李雪, 刘文婷, 窦丽婷, 刘叶红. 联合护理在腹腔镜食管裂孔疝修补中的应用效果分析[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 750-754.
[3] 王红艳, 马艳丽, 郑洁灿. 手术室综合护理在腹股沟疝手术中的应用效果[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 755-758.
[4] 代格格, 杨丽, 胡媛媛, 周文婷. 手术室综合干预在老年腹股沟疝患者中的应用效果[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 759-763.
[5] 王蕾, 王少华, 牛海珍, 尹腾飞. 儿童腹股沟疝围手术期风险预警干预[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 768-772.
[6] 朱青青, 卫贞祺. 腹股沟疝患者围手术期自我能效管理探讨[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 773-777.
[7] 戴玮, 江桂林, 车兆平, 张姣, 王星星, 赵海涛. 无缝手术护理在腹股沟疝腹腔镜手术围手术期的应用效果[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 778-781.
[8] 李梅, 孔珊珊. Robocare护理模式联合高频胸壁振荡在腹腔镜腹壁切口疝修补术的应用[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 619-624.
[9] 方红燕, 刘晓昌, 方家旭. 腹部按压联合综合护理在腹壁造口旁疝患者肠镜检查中的应用效果[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 625-629.
[10] 朱迪, 欧阳钒, 杨丹, 华敏, 吴倩. 双轨护理在老年腹股沟疝无张力修补术围手术期的应用[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 630-634.
[11] 张汪, 徐淑英, 张爱华, 夏芬荣, 汪露. 手术室体温护理结合细节护理干预在老年腹股沟疝围手术期的应用效果[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 635-638.
[12] 陈艺丹, 刘晓楠, 李晶, 张烁, 刘丹. 持续质量改进手术室护理在开放腹股沟疝修补术中的应用效果[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 639-642.
[13] 郑华蓉, 刘俊, 郑艳, 陈玉莲, 廖子敏. 加速康复外科理念下的集束化护理模式在腹股沟疝修补术中的应用效果[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 643-646.
[14] 姜里蛟, 张峰, 周玉萍. 多学科诊疗模式救治老年急性非静脉曲张性上消化道大出血患者的临床观察[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(06): 520-524.
[15] 王小娜, 谭微, 李悦, 姜文艳. 预测性护理对结直肠癌根治术患者围手术期生活质量、情绪及并发症的影响[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(06): 525-529.
阅读次数
全文


摘要