预览加载中,请您耐心等待几秒...
1/3
2/3
3/3

在线预览结束,喜欢就下载吧,查找使用更方便

如果您无法下载资料,请参考说明:

1、部分资料下载需要金币,请确保您的账户上有足够的金币

2、已购买过的文档,再次下载不重复扣费

3、资料包下载后请先用软件解压,在使用对应软件打开

JModMedHealth,May2021,Vol.37,No.9・1465・•论著•超声引导下收肌管联合神经阻滞在ipAck膝关节置换术后镇痛中的应用研究*刘宇权,乌卩文伟,王军,曾志文,廖亿舞(梅州市人民医院麻醉科,广东梅州514031)[摘要]目的探讨超'引导下收肌管联合ipAck神经阻滞用于膝关节置换术后镇痛的临床效果$方法选取该院2018年2月至2019年12月该院收治的行膝关节置换术患者90例,随机分为对照组(45例)和观察组(45例),分别采用超'引导下收肌管阻滞和超'引导下收肌管联合ipAck神经阻滞方案行术后镇痛$比较两组术后48h疼痛数字评分法11(NRS)静态/动态评分曲线下面积(AUC)、麻醉药物使用情况[舒芬太尼使用量、静脉自控镇痛泵(PCIA)按压率)下床最多活动步数及主动屈膝最大角度$结果观察组术后48hNRS静态/动态评分AUC均显著低于对照组;舒芬太尼用量显著少于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)两组PCIA按压率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)观察组术后48h下床最多活动数和步主动屈膝最大角度均显著多于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)结论超'引导下收肌管联合ipAck神经阻滞用于膝关节置换术后镇痛可有效缓解患者术后疼痛程度,减少麻醉药物用量,并有助于改善患者早期活动功能$[关键词]超'&收肌管阻滞;ipAck神经阻滞;膝关节置换术;镇痛DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1009-5519.202109.008中图法分类号:R614.3;R614.4文章编号:1009-5519(2021)09-1465-03文献标识码:AStudyontheapplicationofadductortubecombinedwithipAcknerveblockunderultrasoundguidanceinanalgesiaafterknee*arthroplastyLIUYuquan,WUWenzvei,WANGJunZENGZhixvenLIAOYiling(.DepartmentofAnesthesiology^MeizhouPeople'Hospital■,Meizhou,Guangdong514031China')[Abstract]ObjectiveToexploretheclinicaleffectofadductortubecombinedwithipAcknerveblockunderultrasoundguid­anceinanalgesiaafterkneearthroplasty.MethodsAtotalof90patientsundergoingkneearthroplastyinthehospitalfromFebru­ary2018toDecember2019wereselectedandrandomlydividedintocontrolgroup(45cases)andobservationgroup(45cases).AdduGtortubebloGkunderultrasoundguidanGeandadduGtortubeGombinedwithipAGknervebloGkultrasound-guidedwereadopt-edforpostoperativeanalgesiarespectively.TheAreaunderthecurve(AUC)ofstatic/dynamicscoreofnumericalpainscore11(NRS),theuseofanesthetics[theusageofsufentanil,thecompressionrateofintravenouspatient-controlledanalgesiapump(PI­CA)],themaximumnumberofstepstogetoutofbed,andthemaximumangleofactivekneeflexionat48hoursaftertheopera­tionwerecomparedbetweenthetwogroups.ResultsTheAUCofstatic/dynamicscoreofNRSat48hafteroperationintheob­servationgroupwassignificantlylowerthanthatinthecontrolgroup;thedosageofsufentanilintheobservationgroupwassignifi­cantlylessthanthatinthecontrolgroup,andthedifferenceswerestatisticallysignific