The Therapeutic Efficacy Of Compound Huangbo Liouid With Continuous Diffusion Of Oxygen Therapy Compared With Moist Dressing In The Treatment Of Pressure Ulcer Category ? Or ?

Purpose This subject compares the efficacy of compound huangbai fluid combined with continuous diffusion of oxygen therapy and moist dressing in patients with pressure ulcer in category III and IV and compares whether the two methods of treatment are related to wound healing time,wound healing evaluation,PUSH score,pain score,etc.There are differences in order to provide effective solutions and scientific basis for the treatment of pressure ulcers in the future.Method105 inpatients with stage III and IV pressure ulcers in the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangdong Pharmaceutical University were selected according to the sequence of their admission time.According to the random number distribution method,they were divided into experimental group(50 cases)and routine group(55 cases).After receiving the basic treatment,the experimental group used the compound huangbai fluid combined with continuous diffusion of oxygen,and the routine group received the moist dressing regimen.PUSH scores(including wound size,tissue type,and volume changes),wound healing rate,and pain scores were recorded on the 3rd,7th,14 th,21st,and 28 th days,respectively.Statistical analysis was performed on the collected data using t test,variance analysis,chi-square test,and rank sum test.Result1.Comparison of baseline data between the two groups: 105 patients participated in the whole course of treatment,including 50 in the experimental group,with an average age of 74.44±8.39 years;55 persons in the routine group,with an average age of 76.53±7.01 years.There was no significant difference in gender,age,BMI,albumin,and the department in which the test group and the routine group(P>0.05).The basic characteristics of the two groups of patients were comparable.2.Comparison of basic information on pressure ulcers between the two groups: There was no statistically significant difference in wound area size,wound depth,PUSH score,and pain score between the experimental group and the routine group(P>0.05).The data was comparable.3.Comparison of wound healing scores between the two groups of treatment methods: PUSH score results showed that on the 7th day,the PUSH score of the experimental group was 15.26±0.44,and that of the routinegroup was 15.72±0.44;on the following 14 th day,On the 21 st and 28th days,the PUSH score of the experimental group was lower than that of the routinegroup.The healing effect of the former was more obvious.Regardless of the intergroup comparison between the two groups of patients or between the two groups,the total score of wound size,wound tissue type,and wound exudates decreased,indicating that the higher the degree of healing.There was a statistically significant difference between groups(P<0.05).4.Comparison of wound healing rate between the two groups of treatment methods: On the third day,there was no significant difference in wound healing rate between the experimental group and the routinegroup(P=0.857);on the 14 th,21st,and 28 th days,the wounds of the experimental group The healing rate was higher than that of the routinegroup,with a statistically significant difference(P<0.05);the results of the wound healing rate at the observation point of the continuous time can be obtained.There is no significant difference in the healing rate between the two groups of treatment methods on the 3rd and7 th days.From the 7th day onwards,the healing rate of both groups increased to varying degrees,and the experimental group was higher than the routinegroup,with statistical significance(P<0.05).5.Comparison of wound pain scores between the two groups: On the 7th day of treatment,pain scores between the two groups(7.72 ± 0.50 in the test group and 7.74 ± 0.54 in the routine group)were not significantly different(P> 0.05);on the 14 th day,21 st and 28 th days,the degree of pain in the groups gradually decreased.Compared with the routinegroup,the pain score of the experimental group was lower than that of the routinegroup,indicating that the experimental group had better effect on relieving pressure sore pain.Differences in pain score between the two groups were statistically significant(P<0.05).6.Safety evaluation: There were no adverse reactions associated with dressings and impaired liver and kidney function in both groups.Conclusion1.Compound huangbai fluid combined with continuous diffusion of oxygen therapy and moist dressings are both effective in treating stage III and IV pressure ulcers,and the effective rate is 100%.2.Compared with the moist dressing method,the efficacy of compound Huangbaiye fluid combined with continuous diffusion of oxygen therapy for patients with pressure sores in stage III and IV is more significant.