| 组合式下肢弹力加压装置的设计与弹力绷带的比较 |
|
摘要点击次数: 1827
全文下载次数: 574
投稿时间：2020-05-17
|
| 作者 | Author | 单位 | Address | E-Mail |
| 曾令员 |
ZENG Ling-yuan |
山西医科大学第二医院骨科, 山西太原 030001 |
Department of Orthopaedics, the Second Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan 030001, Shanxi, China |
|
| 卫小春 |
WEI Xiao-chun |
山西医科大学第二医院骨科, 山西太原 030001 |
Department of Orthopaedics, the Second Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan 030001, Shanxi, China |
|
| 王涛 |
WANG Tao |
山西医科大学第二医院骨科, 山西太原 030001 |
Department of Orthopaedics, the Second Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan 030001, Shanxi, China |
|
| 王宇泽 |
WANG Yu-ze |
山西医科大学第二医院骨科, 山西太原 030001 |
Department of Orthopaedics, the Second Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan 030001, Shanxi, China |
|
| 张晖 |
ZHANG Hui |
山西医科大学第二医院骨科, 山西太原 030001 |
Department of Orthopaedics, the Second Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan 030001, Shanxi, China |
|
| 王康 |
WANG Kang |
山西医科大学第二医院骨科, 山西太原 030001 |
Department of Orthopaedics, the Second Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan 030001, Shanxi, China |
|
| 张志强 |
ZHANG Zhi-qiang |
山西医科大学第二医院骨科, 山西太原 030001 |
Department of Orthopaedics, the Second Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan 030001, Shanxi, China |
13393430930@163.com |
|
| 期刊信息：《中国骨伤》2021年，第34卷，第3期，第243-248页 |
| DOI：10.12200/j.issn.1003-0034.2021.03.011 |
| 基金项目: |
|
中文摘要:
目的：与3M弹力绷带的改良罗伯特琼斯绷带比较，评估模块化组合方式的下肢弹力加压装置的适体性、便捷性、安全性和舒适性。
方法：40位健康成年大学生，其中男28例，女12例，年龄16~25（20.3±2.2）岁；体重40~81（60.4±20.2） kg，将其左右下肢进行随机自身配对分组，每组40个样本。根据国人下肢的体表参数，以模块化理念为指导，设计一组模块化组合式下肢弹力加压装置，将各模块进行组合，评估模块组合加压装置在研究对象下肢的长度和周长包裹的适体性，将其左右下肢进行随机自身配对分组，每组40个样本，应用该弹力加压装置（试验组）和3M弹力绷带的改良罗伯特琼斯绷带（对照组），统计比较两者在操作安置时间及调整次数和所需时间的便捷性差异，比较两者应用24 h后压力损伤的安全性差异，采用视觉模拟评分法（visual analogue scale，VAS）记录两者24 h内主观疼痛感觉变化来评估舒适度。
结果：该装置由若干长度不等的宽15 cm的弹力加压外衬模块，一个起缓冲、定位和附着主体作用的内衬模块和一个弹力足踝加压模块组成，弹力加压外衬模块长度涵盖人体下肢的周长，单个外衬模块长度每间隔5 cm从15 cm递增至80 cm，单个内衬模块长度每间隔3 cm从62 cm增加至83 cm，将各模块选配组合后可达研究对象下肢长度和周长的100%适体性，试验组首次安置操作时间（118.23±7.33） s和再次操作时间（60.08±5.88） s均明显短于对照组首次安置操作时间（164.68±8.93） s和再次操作时间（131.23±7.91） s，试验组调整次数（3）和操作时间（3.50±0.71）s与对照组调整次数（11）和操作时间（139.00±5.66） s比较，差异有统计学意义（P<0.05），而两组压力性损伤差异无统计学意义（P>0.05），各时间点VAS评分试验组明显小于对照组（P<0.01）。
结论：模块化组合式弹力加压装置具有很好的适体性，较好的安置和灵活调节便捷性及安全性，舒适性较3M弹力绷带的改良罗伯特琼斯绷带好。 |
| 【关键词】模块化 组合 弹力加压装置 加压疗法 |
| |
| Design of combined lower limb elastic compression device and comparative study with elastic bandag |
|
ABSTRACT
Objective: To compared with the modified Robert Jones bandage of 3M elastic bandage,to evaluate the fitness,convenience,safety and comfort of the modular combination lower limb elastic compression device.
Methods: Forty healthy adult college students,including 28 males and 12 females,aged 16 to 25(20.3±2.2) years old and weighing 40 to 81 (60.4±20.2) kg,were randomly divided into two groups with 40 samples in each group. According to the body surface parameters of Chinese lower limbs and guided by the concept of modularization,a group of modular combined lower limb elastic compression device was designed. Each module was combined to evaluate the fitness of the modular combined compression device in the length and circumference of the lower limbs. The left and right lower limbs were randomly paired and divided into groups,with 40 samples in each group. The convenience of the operation time,adjustment times and required time were compared between two groups. The safety of the two groups after 24 hours of application of pressure injury was compared. The subjective pain feeling changes within 24 hours were recorded by visual analogue scale(VAS) to evaluate the comfort.
Results: The device was composed of several elastic compression outer lining modules with different length and width of 15 cm,an inner lining module for buffering,positioning and attaching the main body,and an elastic ankle compression module. The length of the elastic compression outer lining module covers the circumference of the human lower limbs. The length of a single outer lining module increased from 15 cm to 80 cm every 5 cm interval,and the length of a single inner lining module increased from 62 cm to 83 cm every 3 cm interval. After the modules were selected and combined,the length and circumference of the lower limbs can reach 100% fitness. The operation time of the first placement(118.23±7.33) s and re-operation(60.08±5.88) s of exgroup(11)and operation time(139.00±5.66) s (P<0.05),but there was no significant difference between two groups (P>0.05). The VAS score of experimental group was significantly lower than that of control group at each time point(P<0.01).
Conclusion: The modular combined elastic compression device has good fitness,better placement and flexible adjustment,convenience and safety,and better comfort than modified Robert Jones bandage of 3M elastic bandage. |
| KEY WORDS Modular Combined Elastic pressure device Pressure therapy |
| |
| 引用本文，请按以下格式著录参考文献： |
| 中文格式: | 曾令员,卫小春,王涛,王宇泽,张晖,王康,张志强.组合式下肢弹力加压装置的设计与弹力绷带的比较[J].中国骨伤,2021,34(3):243~248 |
| 英文格式: | ZENG Ling-yuan,WEI Xiao-chun,WANG Tao,WANG Yu-ze,ZHANG Hui,WANG Kang,ZHANG Zhi-qiang.Design of combined lower limb elastic compression device and comparative study with elastic bandag[J].zhongguo gu shang / China J Orthop Trauma ,2021,34(3):243~248 |
|
| 阅读全文 下载 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
|
|
|
