两种不同规格蝶翼无损伤针衬垫敷料的应用效果比较

Comparison of the Application Effects of Two Different Specifications of Butterfly-Wing Non-Invasive Needle Pad Dressings

摘要: 目的：比较两种不同规格的输液港蝶翼无损伤针衬垫敷料的应用效果。方法：将360例留置静脉输液港患者随机分成两组，每组180例。两组患者均按统一的标准操作流程穿刺和拔除蝶翼无损伤针。A组选择6.0 × 4.0 cm规格的无菌纱布置于蝶翼无损伤针下方，B组选择2.5 × 3.0 cm规格的无菌纱布置于蝶翼无损伤针下方。记录使用两种不同规格的蝶翼无损伤针衬垫敷料机械性压伤、疼痛程度、一次有效固定率。结果：两组患者机械性压伤、疼痛比较，差异具有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。B组一次有效固定率高于A组，差异具有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。结论：留置静脉输液港患者使用2.5 × 3.0 cm规格的无菌纱布置于蝶翼无损伤针下方可有效保护皮肤，避免机械性压伤发生，减轻疼痛，降低医疗成本，提高护士工作效能，临床可行性更佳。

Abstract: Objective: To compare the clinical performance of two different sizes of gauze pads used as under-needle dressings for butterfly-wing non-coring needles in totally implantable venous access ports (TIVAPs). Methods: 360 TIVAP patients were randomly divided into two groups of 180. All needles were inserted and removed following an identical standard operating procedure. Group A: a 6.0 × 4.0 cm sterile gauze pad was placed under the needle. Group B: a 2.5 × 3.0 cm sterile gauze pad was used instead. The incidence of mechanical pressure injury, pain score, and first-attempt securement success rate were recorded. Results: Significant differences were found between the two groups in pressure injury and pain (P < 0.05). Group B achieved a higher first-attempt securement success rate than Group A (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Placing a 2.5 × 3.0 cm sterile gauze pad under the butterfly-wing non-coring needle effectively protects the skin, reduces mechanical pressure injury and pain, lowers medical costs, and improves nursing efficiency, offering better clinical feasibility.