背景:胺碘酮是一种用于预防心律失常的预防性节律调节药物;然而,尤其是在输液过程中,它有可能导致一些并发症,尤其是静脉炎.
目的:本研究的目的是确定芝麻油的作用,有可能预防在心脏手术后患者输注胺碘酮期间可能发生的静脉炎。
方法:这种前瞻性,双臂(1:1),区组随机对照介入研究。
方法:这项研究是对在大学医院的冠状动脉重症监护病房接受治疗的44名患者进行的,他接受了胺碘酮的肠胃外输注。通过向套管的10cm周边施加10滴10分钟来表面施加芝麻油。在24小时胺碘酮输注期间每8小时重复该应用。对照组未对患者进行干预。然而,在外周导管应用阶段,两组患者均采用标准护理措施和标准透明敷料.干预组和对照组的患者在每24小时结束时使用视觉输注静脉炎量表评估静脉炎。该研究是根据CONSORT声明报告的。
结果:干预组15/22(68.2%)患者在第一天出现静脉炎症状,第2天3/22(13.6%),第3天2/22(9.1%),而在对照组中,20/22(90.9%)患者在第一天出现静脉炎,2/22(9.1%)在第二天出现静脉炎。干预组静脉炎发生率为20/22(90.9%),对照组为22/22(100%)。组间静脉炎症状无统计学差异。
结论:研究结果表明,芝麻油的应用并未显着降低静脉炎的发生频率。然而,在芝麻油组中观察到表明静脉炎症状延迟发作的趋势。然而,需要更大的样本研究。这些研究有望帮助更精确地确定芝麻油对静脉炎的影响,并为结果提供更有力的支持。
结论:应支持对护士进行非药物方法的培训,并应给予其应用机会。
BACKGROUND: Amiodarone is a prophylactic rhythm-regulating drug used to prevent arrhythmia; However, especially during infusion, it has the potential to cause a number of complications, especially phlebitis.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the
study is to determine the effects of sesame oil, which has the potential to prevent phlebitis that may occur during amiodarone infusion administered to patients after cardiac surgery.
METHODS: This prospective, two-arm (1:1), block randomized controlled interventional
study.
METHODS: This
study was conducted with 44 patients treated in the coronary intensive care unit of a university hospital, who received parenteral infusion of amiodarone. Sesame oil was applied superficially by applying 10 drops to a 10 cm perimeter of the cannula for 10 min. This application was repeated every 8 h during the 24-h amiodarone infusion. No intervention was made to the patients in the control group. However, standard nursing care measures and a standard transparent dressing were applied to the patients in both groups during the peripheral catheter application phase. Patients in the intervention and control groups were evaluated in terms of phlebitis at the end of every 24 h using the Visual Infusion Phlebitis Scale. The
study was reported according to the CONSORT declaration.
RESULTS: Phlebitis symptoms occurred in 15/22 (68.2%) of the patients in the intervention group on the first day, 3/22 (13.6%) on the second day and 2/22 (9.1%) of the patients on the third day, while in the control group, 20/22 (90.9%) of the patients had phlebitis on the first day and 2/22 (9.1%) on the second day. The incidence of phlebitis was 20/22 (90.9%) in the intervention group and 22/22 (100%) in the control group. There was no statistically significant difference in phlebitis symptoms between groups.
CONCLUSIONS: The research results showed that the application of sesame oil did not significantly reduce the frequency of phlebitis. However, a trend indicating delayed onset of phlebitis symptoms was observed in the sesame oil group. Nevertheless, larger sample studies are needed. These studies are expected to assist in determining the effects of sesame oil on phlebitis more precisely and provide stronger support for the results.
CONCLUSIONS: Training of nurses on non-pharmacological methods should be supported and opportunities should be given for their application.