Application analysis of central venous catheter inserted into peripheral vein in tumor nursing
外周静脉置入中心静脉导管在肿瘤护理中的应用分析

摘要

目的 探究肿瘤患者护理当中采用外周静脉置入中心静脉导管价值效果。方法 本次肿瘤患者护理效果研究，以时间段2022年1月到2023年3月为研究时间，以肿瘤患者72例为研究对象，以随机表法分为PICC护理组（采用外周静脉置入中心静脉导管护理）与常规护理组（采用常规肿瘤患者穿刺及护理）各36例，将两组肿瘤患者。结果 护理干预前常规护理组和PICC护理组在状况较好率方面并无较大差异P>0.05，没有统计学意义。护理干预后，常规护理组状况较好患者25例，占比69.44%，PICC护理组状况较好患者34例，占比94.44%，可见肿瘤患者ecog量表评分日常活动能力数据差异性较大，P<0.05。常规护理组肿瘤患者相对比于PICC护理组，后者明显更有优势，在免疫指标数值上有着明显的差异，P<0.05，两组肿瘤患者免疫指标差异性较大有统计学意义。两组肿瘤症状缓解评分、穿刺异常状况评分、肿瘤患者满意度评分对比明显PICC护理组各项得分较高，P<0.05，两组肿瘤患者各项护理评分对比有统计学意义。结论 常规传统穿刺治疗固然在肿瘤治疗中有一定疗效，但PICC更符合当下肿瘤治疗的主流，这不仅体现在肿瘤患者日常生活能力当中，更体现在实际两组肿瘤患者免疫力、治疗效果、安全性及患者认可度当中，因此更应在临床进行推广。

Abstract

Objective To explore the value and effect of peripheral vein placement into central venous catheter in the nursing of cancer patients.
Methods This study on the nursing effect of cancer patients was conducted from January 2022 to March 2023, and 72 cancer patients were selected as the research objects. By random table method, they were divided into PICC nursing group (peripheral vein placement central venous catheter nursing) and routine nursing group (routine puncture and nursing of cancer patients), 36 cases in each group. Two groups of tumor patients.
Results There was no significant difference in the rate of good condition between the conventional nursing group and the PICC nursing group before nursing intervention (P>0.05). After nursing intervention, 25 patients in the conventional nursing group were in good condition, accounting for 69.44%, and 34 patients in the PICC nursing group were in good condition, accounting for 94.44%. It can be seen that the data of daily activity ability of cancer patients scored by ecog scale had a large difference (P<0.05). Compared with PICC nursing group, the latter group had obvious advantages, and there was a significant difference in the value of immune indexes (P<0.05). The difference in immune indexes of tumor patients in the two groups was statistically significant. There was significant comparison between the two groups on tumor symptom relief score, puncture abnormality score and tumor patient satisfaction score, and the scores of PICC nursing group were higher (P<0.05), and the comparison of various nursing scores of tumor patients between the two groups was statistically significant.
Conclusion   Although conventional puncture therapy has certain efficacy in tumor treatment, PICC is more in line with the mainstream of current tumor treatment, which is not only reflected in the daily life ability of tumor patients, but also reflected in the actual immunity, therapeutic effect, safety and patient recognition of the two groups of tumor patients, so it should be promoted in clinical practice.