Value of the parallel seamless link rescue mode in the optimization of patients with craniocerebral trauma

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-9141.2019.03.007

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective

To explore the value of parallel seamless link rescue mode in optimizing patients with craniocerebral trauma.

Methods

A total of 94 patients with craniocerebral trauma who underwent Neurosurgery Department from the First Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University from January 2016 to December 2017 were enrolled. According to the digital table method, the patients were divided into parallel linked rescue mode groups (observation group) and routine rescue mode group (control group), 47 cases in each group. The treatment time, LOTCA score, and clinical efficacy of the two groups were compared and analyzed.

Results

The time of the observation group (door-to-imaging time, imaging-to-needle time, and the treatment time) were significantly shorter than those of the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). The perception and thinking scores and treatment efficiency in observation group were significantly higher than those in the control group, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05).

Conclusion

Parallel seamless link rescue mode has short treatment time and high work efficiency, which is worth promoting.

Key words: Parallel seamless link rescue mode, Craniocerebral trauma, LOTCA score

Shuo Yang, Dan Shan, Shuang Huang, Ruiqi Xu, Zhen Guan. Value of the parallel seamless link rescue mode in the optimization of patients with craniocerebral trauma[J]. Chinese Journal of Neurotraumatic Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2019, 05(03): 159-162.

/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://zhsjcswkdzzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-9141.2019.03.007

https://zhsjcswkdzzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/Y2019/V05/I03/159

Figures/Tables 4

References 15

[1]	王永斌.重症颅脑外伤的临床治疗研究进展[J].中国伤残医学, 2016, 24(11): 62-63.
[2]	Salinsky M, Storzbach D, Goy E, et al. Traumatic brain injury and psychogenic seizures in veterans[J]. J Head Trauma Rehabil, 2015, 30(1): E65-E70.
[3]	陈珠峰,李雪玉.优质护理在颅脑外伤急救护理中的应用效果[J].临床合理用药杂志, 2016, 9(35): 108-109.
[4]	Schmitt S, Dichter MA. Electrophysiologic recordings in traumatic brain injury[J]. Handb Clin Neurol, 2015, 127: 319-339.
[5]	徐红.细节护理在颅脑外伤患者护理中的应用[J].中医药管理杂志, 2017, 25(6): 75-77.
[6]	赵小斐,李冬梅,何满红,等.急性颅脑损伤患者院前急救护理的效果分析[J].中国实用护理杂志, 2010, 26(6): 19-20.
[7]	Masino SA, Kawamura M, Wasser CD, et al. Adenosine, ketogenic diet and epilepsy: the emerging therapeutic relationship between metabolism and brain activity[J]. Curr Neuropharmacol, 2009, 7(3): 257-268.
[8]	Bernadeta S. Zinc homeostasis and neurodegenerative disorders[J]. Front Aging Neurosci, 2013, 5(6): 33.
[9]	Gu B, Huang YZ, He XP, et al. A peptide uncoupling BDNF receptor TrkB from phospholipase Cγ1 prevents epilepsy induced by status epilepticus[J]. Neuron, 2015, 88(3): 484-491.
[10]	李伟.重型颅脑损伤患者应用一体化急救模式的效果[J].基层医学论坛, 2013, 17(7): 841-842.
[11]	魏琳.香港医院卒中小组护士的角色与启示[J].中华护理杂志, 2009, 44(8): 748-749.
[12]	王宁,王清,邵小平.应用FOCUS-PDCA程序改进NICU医院感染的管理[J].中华医院感染学杂志, 2012, 22(11): 2364-2365.
[13]	Jauch EC, Saver JL, Adams HP Jr, et al. Guidelines for the early management of patients with acute ischemic stroke: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association[J]. Stroke, 2013, 44(3): 870-947.
[14]	林林,曾燕梅.优化急救护理流程对重症颅脑外伤急诊手术患者的救治影响[J].现代医学与健康研究电子杂志, 2017, 72(7): 95.
[15]	Meretoja A, Strbian D, Mustanoja S, et al. Reducing in-hospital delay to 20 minutes in stroke thrombolysis[J]. Neurology, 2012, 79(4): 306-313.

组别	例数	性别（男/女）	年龄	脑挫裂伤/蛛网膜下腔出血/颅脑骨折	GCS评分
观察组	47	29/18	63.4±17.3	14/18/15	10.5±2.8
对照组	47	31/16	62.8±16.6	17/16/14	10.1±3.2
t/χ²值	?	0.184	0.171	0.442	0.644
P值	?	0.668	0.864	0.802	0.520

组别	例数	性别（男/女）	年龄	脑挫裂伤/蛛网膜下腔出血/颅脑骨折	GCS评分
观察组	47	29/18	63.4±17.3	14/18/15	10.5±2.8
对照组	47	31/16	62.8±16.6	17/16/14	10.1±3.2
t/χ²值	?	0.184	0.171	0.442	0.644
P值	?	0.668	0.864	0.802	0.520

组别	例数	DIT	INT	治疗时间
对照组	47	58.2±16.4	69.5±24.2	116.8±24.4
观察组	47	18.7±10.5	24.8±9.8	45.7±16.2
t值	?	6.225	5.428	5.692
P值	?	0.001	0.002	0.002

组别	例数	DIT	INT	治疗时间
对照组	47	58.2±16.4	69.5±24.2	116.8±24.4
观察组	47	18.7±10.5	24.8±9.8	45.7±16.2
t值	?	6.225	5.428	5.692
P值	?	0.001	0.002	0.002

组别	例数	知觉	定向	思维运动	视运动
对照组	47	13.15±2.64	2.16±1.02	15.23±2.85	22.39±2.76
观察组	47	16.28±3.40	2.15±0.98	17.27±2.65	21.44±2.37
t值	?	4.291	1.462	4.480	1.620
P值	?	0.002	0.096	0.003	0.105

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export