Comparison Of The Sealing Effects Of Two Kinds Of Sealing Tube Positive Pressure Needle

OBJECTIVE：To evaluate the sealed tube effects of positive intravenous catheter heparindilution and physiological saline, at the same time, comparing the differences betweenof them, in the end to investigate the possibility of using physiological saline insteadof heparin dilution sealed tube in clinic.METHODS：Between January2014and August2014,409patients in The Second AffiliatedHospital of Qiqihar Medical University of cardiovascular internal medicine, which wereselected by odd or even number and were divided into two groups, intervention groupand control group. The intervention group (sodium heparin dilution sealing tube group)was207cases, the control group (physiological saline sealing tube group) was202cases.We observed the catheter plugging, the average indwelling time, phlebitis incidence rateand bleeding rate and so on.RESULTS：The age, sex, marital status, history of hypertension, smoking history of two groupswas no significant difference of on admission (P>0.05), the educational level andoccupational types were different between two groups. The averaged indwelling time oftwo kinds of sealing tube methods was statistically significant (t=13.658, P <0.001),which the averaged indwelling time was151.23±26.21hours in the sealing tube groupwith heparin sodium diluent. The longest indwelling time was194hours and the shortestindwelling time was117hours. The averaged indwelling time was121.71±16.53hours inthe sealing tube group with normal saline. The longest indwelling time was144hours andthe shortest indwelling time was80hours. The rate of blocking the blood vessel between two sealing tube methods was no significant difference (2=1.285, P=0.257). Which9patients were catheter clogging in the sealing tube group with heparin sodium diluent.Blocking the tube was4.3%;14patients were catheter clogging in the sealing tube groupwith normal saline. Blocking the tube was6.9%; The partial phlebitis of two kinds ofsealing tube methods was no statistically significant (2=0.367, P=0.545), Which16patients had phlebitis in the sealing tube group with heparin sodium diluent. The phlebitiswas7.7%;19patients had phlebitis in the sealing tube group with normal saline. Thephlebitis9.4%; The bleeding rate of two kinds of sealing tube methods was statisticallysignificant (2=16.513, P<0.001), Which35patients were bleeding in the sealing tubegroup with heparin sodium diluent. The bleeding rate was16.9%;9patients were bleedingin the sealing tube group with normal saline. The bleeding rate was4.5%.CONCLUSIONS：Compared with the method of sealing tube with saline, although the method of sealingtube with heparin fluid can effectively extend the indwelling catheter time, butincrease the incidence of skin and mucous membrane bleeding. Compared the methodof sealing tube with heparin fluid and the method of sealing tube with saline, there wasno significant difference in reducing the rate of blocked tubes and incidence of phlebitis. Toclinical patients needs long-term intravenous infusion, considering the comprehensive benefitsof two sealing tube methods with positive intravenous needles heparin dilution and saline,efficacy and safety. We recommend that clinical nurses should choose saline insteadof heparin dilution sealed tube.