新疆18所医院护理安全存在的问题与对策

目的:查找医院护理安全方面存在的主要问题,探讨医院护理安全管理方法。方法:对新疆18所二级以上医院"百日安全检查"结果进行统计分析,找出主要问题,提出整改措施。结果:18所医院护理安全管理方面普遍存在问题。结论:各级医院应以"百日安全检查"活动为契机,重视护理安全,建立健全护理安全管理系统,保证护理安全管理有效性,才能保证病人安全。     

眼底荧光血管造影检查的护理

目的探讨眼底荧光血管造影检查的护理.方法 对189例眼底荧光血管造影检查患者,在造影前、中、后进行全程护理,并对造影剂的副作用进行观察及处理.结果 本组患者在正确护理配合下眼底荧光血管造影均成功,未出现严重不良反应.结论 正确的护理措施,可以预防和减少并发症的发生,并能取得满意的效果.     

人性化保护性约束在ICU护理管理中的应用价值研究

目的探讨人性化保护性约束在ICU护理管理中的应用价值。方法选取我院于2016年3月至2017年6月接收的80例ICU患者,将这80字例患者进行数字排列,单数为参照组,双数为研究照,每组40例。参照组采用常规护理,研究组在参照组护理的基础上加上个性化保护性约束。观察两组采用的护理模式在护理管理中的应用价值。结果根据研究结果显示,实验组的SAS评分、满意度明显优于对照组,P0.05,具有统计学意义。结论在ICU护理管理中启动人性化保护性约束,能有效降低患者的不良反应应率,提高患者的满意度,其护理效果显著,值得在临床护理中广泛应用。     

Comparison of acute toxicities between two postoperative concurrent chemoradiotherapy regimens of capecitabine with or without oxaliplatin in patients with stage Ⅱ and Ⅲ rectal cancer

Objective To compare the acute toxicities between two prospective, non-randomize phase Ⅱ trials on adjuvant radiochemotherapy of capecitabine with or without oxaliplatin in patients with stage Ⅱ and Ⅲ rectal cancer. Methods From March 2005 to November 2007,based on two fulfilled phase Ⅰ studies,two phase Ⅱ trials were launched respectively to further observe the tolerance and toxicity. In one tria1,118 patients were treated with concurrent capecitabine and radiotherapy (Cap-CRT trial), with radio-therapy of DT50 Gy/25 F/5 wks to the pelvis, and capecitabine at a dose of 1600 mg/m2/d(d1-d14,3 weeks per cycle). In the other trial, 90 patients received concurrent oxaliplatin, capecitabine and radiothera-py(Cap-Oxa-CRT trial), with the same radiotherapy schedule, while oxaliplatin at a dose of 70 mg/m2(d1, d8) and capecitabine of 1300 mg/m2/d(d1-d14,3 weeks per cycle). Results There was no significant difference in the delay of radiotherapy (10.2% vs 6.7%, X2=0.80, P=0.460) or chemotherapy (9.3% vs 19.1%, X2=4.80,P=0.090) between Cap-CRT and Cap-Oxa-CRT trials. Grade 1-4 leukopenia,diar-rhea and nausea were the most common acute side-effects in the both trials, accounting for 70.2%, 65.9% and 42.3%, respectively. When comparing with Cap-CRT trial, Cap-Oxa-CRT trial had significantly more grade 1-4 non-hemotological toxicities, mainly in Gl,including nausea (68.9% vs 22.0%, X2=46.90, P= 0.000), diarrbea(76.7% vs 57.6%, X2=13.50, P=0.009), fatigne(47.8% vs 13.7%, X2=18.90,P= 0.000), hand-foot syndrome (14.4% vs 4.2%, X2=7.10, P=0.029), and inappetence (50.0% vs. 27.9%, X2 = 25.70, P=0.000), but not in hematological toxities of leukopenia, anemia or thrombocytope-nia. Of all the patients,grade 3 and grade 4 toxicities were diarrhea(24.0% and 1.0%),leukopenia(4.3% and 0.0%),radiation-induced dermatitis(3.8% and 0.0%),cramping abdominal pain(1.0% and 0.0%) and fatigue(0.5% and 0.0%). Only grade 3 and 4 diarrhea was significantly more in Cap-Oxa-CRT trial than in Cap-CBT trial(33.0% vs 18.6%, X2=5.90,P=0.023). Conclusions For patients with stage Ⅱ and Ⅲ rectal cancer,both the postoperative concurrent radiochemotherapy regimens are tolerable,though Cap-Oxa-CRT trial has more grade 3 and 4 diarrhea.     

Comparison of acute toxicities between two postoperative concurrent chemoradiotherapy regimens of capecitabine with or without oxaliplatin in patients with stage Ⅱ and Ⅲ rectal cancer

Objective To compare the acute toxicities between two prospective, non-randomize phase Ⅱ trials on adjuvant radiochemotherapy of capecitabine with or without oxaliplatin in patients with stage Ⅱ and Ⅲ rectal cancer. Methods From March 2005 to November 2007,based on two fulfilled phase Ⅰ studies,two phase Ⅱ trials were launched respectively to further observe the tolerance and toxicity. In one tria1,118 patients were treated with concurrent capecitabine and radiotherapy (Cap-CRT trial), with radio-therapy of DT50 Gy/25 F/5 wks to the pelvis, and capecitabine at a dose of 1600 mg/m2/d(d1-d14,3 weeks per cycle). In the other trial, 90 patients received concurrent oxaliplatin, capecitabine and radiothera-py(Cap-Oxa-CRT trial), with the same radiotherapy schedule, while oxaliplatin at a dose of 70 mg/m2(d1, d8) and capecitabine of 1300 mg/m2/d(d1-d14,3 weeks per cycle). Results There was no significant difference in the delay of radiotherapy (10.2% vs 6.7%, X2=0.80, P=0.460) or chemotherapy (9.3% vs 19.1%, X2=4.80,P=0.090) between Cap-CRT and Cap-Oxa-CRT trials. Grade 1-4 leukopenia,diar-rhea and nausea were the most common acute side-effects in the both trials, accounting for 70.2%, 65.9% and 42.3%, respectively. When comparing with Cap-CRT trial, Cap-Oxa-CRT trial had significantly more grade 1-4 non-hemotological toxicities, mainly in Gl,including nausea (68.9% vs 22.0%, X2=46.90, P= 0.000), diarrbea(76.7% vs 57.6%, X2=13.50, P=0.009), fatigne(47.8% vs 13.7%, X2=18.90,P= 0.000), hand-foot syndrome (14.4% vs 4.2%, X2=7.10, P=0.029), and inappetence (50.0% vs. 27.9%, X2 = 25.70, P=0.000), but not in hematological toxities of leukopenia, anemia or thrombocytope-nia. Of all the patients,grade 3 and grade 4 toxicities were diarrhea(24.0% and 1.0%),leukopenia(4.3% and 0.0%),radiation-induced dermatitis(3.8% and 0.0%),cramping abdominal pain(1.0% and 0.0%) and fatigue(0.5% and 0.0%). Only grade 3 and 4 diarrhea was significantly more in Cap-Oxa-CRT trial than in Cap-CBT trial(33.0% vs 18.6%, X2=5.90,P=0.023). Conclusions For patients with stage Ⅱ and Ⅲ rectal cancer,both the postoperative concurrent radiochemotherapy regimens are tolerable,though Cap-Oxa-CRT trial has more grade 3 and 4 diarrhea.     

乳腺癌术后调强放疗颈胸一体固定的摆位误差分析

目的 探讨使用颈胸一体架(膜)对乳腺癌术后放疗患者体位固定的效果。方法 前瞻性入组32例乳腺癌术后放疗患者,均使用颈胸一体架(膜)进行体位固定,采用调强放疗技术照射乳腺/胸壁和锁骨上下区,并在放疗中进行锥形束CT(CBCT)位置验证,分别配准乳腺/胸壁靶区和锁骨上下区靶区。对239次CBCT图像的摆位误差和上下靶区位置一致性进行分析。结果 左右、头脚、腹背方向乳腺/胸壁的平移摆位误差分别为(1.84±2.36)、(1.99±2.48)、(1.75±1.86)mm,锁骨上下区的平移摆位误差分别为(1.98±2.44)、(1.98±2.48)、(1.71±1.79)mm。每个病例每次CBCT扫描的乳腺/胸壁与锁骨上下区平移误差的差值在x、y、z方向分别为(0.38±0.66)、(0.07±0.41)、(0.45±0.92)mm。结论 乳腺癌术后放疗患者采用颈胸一体架(膜)进行体位固定,摆位误差小,乳腺/胸壁和锁骨上下区靶区位置有很好的一致性。     

改良根治术后pT1-2N1期乳腺癌的局部区域复发部位——12个中心 5442例患者的联合分析

目的 分析改良根治术后pT1-2N1期乳腺癌患者的局部区域复发(LRR)部位及放疗对复发的影响。方法 收集中国12家医院符合条件的 5442例乳腺癌患者资料,分析放疗和未放疗患者的LRR部位及不同部位放疗对复发的影响。采用Kaplan-Meier法计算LRR率并log-rank法检验。结果 全组中位随访63.8个月,395例患者出现LRR。无论辅助放疗与否和不同分子分型,胸壁和锁骨上区均为最常见的LRR部位。全组胸壁照射和未照射患者的 5年胸壁复发率分别为2.5%和3.8%(P=0.003);锁骨上区照射和未照射患者的 5年锁骨上淋巴结复发率分别为1.3%和4.1%(P<0.001);腋窝照射和未照射患者的 5年无腋窝复发率分别为0.8%和1.5%(HR=0.31,95%CI为 0.04~2.23,P=0.219);内乳照射和未照射患者的 5年无内乳复发率分别为0.8%和1.5%(HR=0.45,95%CI为 0.11~1.90,P=0.268)。结论 改良根治术后pT1-2N1期乳腺癌患者的主要LRR部位是胸壁和锁骨上区,不受辅助放疗与否和分子分型的影响。胸壁和锁骨上区放疗显著降低相应部位的复发风险,而腋窝和内乳放疗未降低相应部位的复发风险。     

乳腺癌保乳术后大分割放疗的不良反应研究进展

研究表明保乳术后大分割放疗与常规分割放疗相比,疗效相当且未增加不良反应,目前已成为全乳照射的优选方案。早期乳腺癌综合治疗后局部复发率低、生存时间长,放疗相关的不良反应是临床关注的焦点。而大分割放疗时代许多不良反应相关的危险因素尚不明确,有待进一步研究。本文就乳腺癌保乳术后大分割放疗的不良反应展开综述。