目的:检测一次性氧气湿化瓶与重复使用湿化瓶用后细菌污染的程度和患者对噪音感受的舒适程度,对比两者的成本效益.方法:随机选出心内科病房内持续吸氧时间超过10天的患者100名,以随机分组的方法分出A组50名、B组50名,A组使用一次性氧气湿化瓶,B组使用重复使用的氧气湿化瓶.按照《医疗卫生机构消毒技术规范》进行采样后送微生物检验室进行病原学检验；同时对两组患者进行噪音感受舒适度的调查；根据使用的氧气湿化瓶成本费用、氧气湿化用灭菌注射用水的价格、含氯消毒剂健之素的费用计算成本.结果:50只一次性氧气湿化瓶使用时间120小时(5天),微生物学检测未发现致病茵,成本费用9.3元/日,患者噪音感受舒适度满意度调查结果为100％；重复使用氧气湿化瓶使用24小时染茵率28％,成本费用9.6元/日,患者噪音感受舒适度满意度调查结果为60％.结论:使用合格的一次性氧气湿化瓶,在患者费用不会增加的前提下,减少了医院感染机会,增加了患者的舒适度,值得推广使用.%Objective: To investigate the cost between disposable oxygen moisture bottle and re-used oxygen moisture bottle. Methods: 100 patients were selected, who continuous oxygen uptake for more than 10 days. And the patients randomly divided into group A (50 cases) and group B (50 cases). Patients in group A used disposable oxygen moisture bottles, Patients in group B used re-used oxygen moisture bottles. The bottles were detected in microbe laboratory according to "Technical standard of disinfection for Medical Institutions". The cost on the basis of oxygen moisture bottles, sterile water and the disinfectant were alculated. Results: No pathogenic bacterias were found in 50 disposable oxygen moisture bottles used 120 hours (5 days) by microbiology testing. By calculating, the cost was ￥9.3/d. However, the contamination rate of re-used oxygen moisture bottles was 28% after 24 hours, and the cost was ￥9.6/d. Conclusions: It's good for patients to introduce to use the qualified disposable oxygen moisture bottles. It's could reduce the opportunities of hospital infection.
展开▼
