目的 分析夹针破膜、弯血管钳破膜及消毒棉签破膜在分娩时人工破膜术中效果。方法 将2019年9月—2021年8月期间收治的91例产妇作为研究对象,按照随机数字表法分为三组,A组30例采用夹针破膜,B组30例采用弯血管钳破膜,C组31例采用消毒棉签破膜,观察三组破膜成功率、术中母婴损伤情况、疼痛程度以及医务人员职业暴露发生情况。结果 三组破膜成功率对比差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）;三组产妇损伤率、胎儿损伤率对比差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）;A组和B组疼痛程度对比差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）,C组疼痛程度轻于A组和B组（P<0.05）;A组和B组医务人员职业暴露发生率对比差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）,C组医务人员职业暴露发生率低于A组和B组（P<0.05）。结论 夹针、组织钳和消毒棉签3种破膜方式均可避免术中母婴损伤,提高破膜成功率,但消毒棉签破膜在减轻疼痛程度,降低医务人员职业暴露发生率方面效果更为显著。
Objective To analyze the effects of artificial membrane rupture using clamping needle, curved vessel forceps, and sterile cotton swabs during delivery. Methods A total of 91 pregnant women treated in our hospital from September 2019 to August 2021 were divided into three groups according to the random number table method： 30 cases in group A were ruptured with clamping needle, 30 cases in group B with curved vessel forceps, and 31 cases in group C with sterile cotton swabs. The success rate of membrane rupture, the injury of mother and baby during operation, the degree of pain, and the occurrence of occupational exposure of medical staff in the three groups were observed. Results There was no significant difference in the success rate of membrane rupture among the three groups （P>0.05）. There were no significant differences in maternal injury rate and fetal injury rate among the three groups （P>0.05）. There was no significant difference in the degree of pain between group A and group B （P>0.05）, and the degree of pain in group C was lighter than those in group A and group B （P<0.05）. There was no significant difference in the incidence rate of occupational exposure between group A and group B （P>0.05）, and the incidence rate of occupational exposure of medical staff in group C was lower than those in group A and group B （P<0.05）. Conclusion The three membrane breaking methods using clamping needle, tissue forceps, and sterile cotton swabs can avoid the injury of mother and baby during operation and improve the success rate of membrane breaking, but sterile cotton swabs show more significant effects in reducing the degree of pain and the incidence of occupational exposure of medical staff.
[1] 黄小燕,李丰容,何杏,等.实施产前综合护理对瘢痕子宫孕妇分娩结局的影响研究[J].外科研究与新技术,2021,10(2):150-152.
[2] 黄凤精,李筱芸,严东琴.不同时机行人工破膜对COOK宫颈扩张球囊引产初产妇的影响分析[J].数理医药学杂志,2020,33(10):1452-1454.
[3] 陈芸,褚伯良,周晔,等.不同人工破膜方式在产科临床应用中的随机对照研究[J].浙江医学,2019,41(11):1201-1203.
[4] 张睿,边建新,韩冬,等.分娩前宫颈成熟度评分的重要性分析[J].临床合理用药杂志,2018,11(17):158-159.
[5] 杨正旭. 不同人工破膜时机在宫颈扩张球囊引产中应用的有效性及安全性[J].中国医药指南,2020,18(19):27-29.
[6] 余婷. 不同破膜方式联合自由体位待产对母婴结局的影响[J].基层医学论坛,2020,24(17):2449-2450.
[7] 陈耘,闫桂敏,朱海,等.硬膜外分娩镇痛对催产素引产孕妇妊娠结局的影响[J].外科研究与新技术,2020,9(4):257-259.
[8] 宋贵玉,乔宠.人工破膜的历史与现状[J].中华产科急救电子杂志,2018,7(3):135-139.
[9] 邢明明. 使用组织钳与针头行人工破膜术的临床效果对比分析[J].中国医疗器械信息, 2020,26(2):102-104.
[10] 梁淑华. 缩宫素配合人工破膜在计划分娩中的应用效果[J].中西医结合心血管病电子杂志,2020,8(36):50-54.
[11] 商辉,党菊霞,于梦雪.某妇幼保健院医务人员血源性职业暴露调查分析与对策[J].新疆中医药,2020,38(2):76-78.
[12] 谢梦琦,欧阳一芹,郭飒,等.瘢痕妊娠五种手术方式治疗的效果比较[J].外科研究与新技术,2019,8(1):25-27.
