【摘要】 目的对比观察湿润烧伤膏治疗外伤性小面积浅层皮肤组织缺损的临床疗效。方法将首都医科大学良乡教学医院2008年12月-2011年12月收治的56例外伤性小面积浅层皮肤组织缺损患者随机分为两组,湿润烧伤膏组35例,采用湿润烧伤膏换药治疗,普通换药组21例,采用西医传统换药疗法治疗,对比观察两组患者的创面愈合时间和创面感染率。结果湿润烧伤膏组患者创面疗效优良率为82.9%,普通换药组患者创面疗效优良率为57.1%,两组对比,P<0.05,差异具有统计学意义;湿润烧伤膏组患者创面平均愈合时间为15.3 d±3.6 d,普通换药组创面平均愈合时间为21.5 d±4.3 d,两组对比,P<0.05,差异具有统计学意义;治疗过程中,湿润烧伤膏组患者创面均无感染,普通换药组中有3例患者创面发生感染,两组对比,P<0.05,差异具有统计学意义。结论湿润烧伤膏治疗外伤性小面积浅层皮肤组织缺损的疗效显著,方法简便,值得临床推广应用。更多还原

【Abstract】 Objective To observe the clinical effects of MEBO Ointment in the treatment of traumatic,smallsized superficial skin tissue defects.Methods Divide the fifty-six patients with traumatic,small-sized superficial skin tissue defects that were admitted into Liangxiang Teaching Hospital of Capital Medical University between December 2008 and December 2011 into a MEBO group(35 cases) and an ordinary group(21 cases);treat the MEBO group with the dressing change of MEBO Ointment while treat the ordinary group with the dressing change of the western conventional therapy;observe and compare the wound healing time and wound infection rate in the two groups.Results The excellent rates of the therapeutic effect in the MEBO group and in the ordinary group were 82.9%and 57.1%,which showed statistically significant difference(P <0.05);the mean wound healing times of the MEBO group and the ordinary group were 15.3 d ±3.6 d and 21.5 d ± 4.3 d,respectively,which showed statistically significant difference(P < 0.05);during the treatment course,there was no infection in the MEBO group and there were 3 cases developed wound infection in the ordinary group,which showed statistically significant difference(P < 0.05).Conclusion MEBO Ointment in the treatment of traumatic,small-sized superficial skin tissue defects can realize significant therapeutic effect and easy operation,worthy of being promoted in clinic.更多还原