Suppr超能文献

对一家儿科烧伤病房两年间使用和未使用Acticoat作为标准敷料的情况进行回顾性比较。

Retrospective comparison of two years in a paediatric burns unit, with and without acticoat as a standard dressing.

作者信息

Strand O, San Miguel L, Rowan S, Sahlqvist A

机构信息

Section of Psychiatry, Department of Experimental Biomedicine and Clinical Neurosciences, Palermo University, Palermo, Italy.

出版信息

Ann Burns Fire Disasters. 2010 Dec 31;23(4):182-5.

Abstract

The Karolinska Burn Unit in Stockholm, Sweden, carried out a retrospective case review in order to compare the cost of the current protocol of care - in place since mid-2002 - with a previous protocol in paediatric burn patients. The study compared the years 2004 and 2007 with the year 2001. 2004 was the first full year in which the unit staff used Acticoat(TM) (Smith & Nephew Wound Management, Hull, England), IntraSite Gel(TM) (idem), and Allevyn Adhesive(TM) (idem) in the treatment of paediatric burns patients. In 2001 the unit used Mepitel(TM) (Molnlycke, Göteborg, Sweden) together with a saline solution and peroxide for cleansing. This study examined differences in both labour and material costs, measured from the hospital's perspective. Our results show that the main impact of the new protocol was on length of stay for hospitalized patients. In 2001 the mean in-patient stay was 12.5 days; in 2004 the mean stay was 5.6 days and, in 2007, 4.5 days (p < 0.001). It is hypothesized that the reason for this significant reduction in length of stay is that most of the patients treated with Acticoat were sent home earlier to be treated as outpatients because there was less need for sedation and/or analgesics, and because the risk of infection was perceived to be less. Pure hospitalization costs per in-patient were approximately Swedish kronor (kr) 67,725 in 2001 (1 kr = approx. € 0.1 or US$ 0.15) and kr 30,305 and kr 24,440 in 2004 and 2007, respectively. This represents a saving of 55% and 64% with respect to 2001 costs.

摘要

瑞典斯德哥尔摩的卡罗林斯卡烧伤中心进行了一项回顾性病例研究,目的是比较自2002年年中起实施的现行护理方案与之前针对小儿烧伤患者的护理方案的成本。该研究将2004年和2007年与2001年进行了比较。2004年是该中心工作人员首次全年使用Acticoat™(施乐辉伤口管理公司,英国赫尔)、IntraSite Gel™(同一家公司)和Allevyn Adhesive™(同一家公司)治疗小儿烧伤患者的年份。2001年,该中心使用Mepitel™(莫林医疗,瑞典哥德堡)以及生理盐水和过氧化氢进行清洁。本研究从医院的角度考察了劳动力成本和材料成本的差异。我们的结果表明,新方案的主要影响在于住院患者的住院时间。2001年的平均住院时间为12.5天;2004年的平均住院时间为5.6天,2007年为4.5天(p < 0.001)。据推测,住院时间大幅缩短的原因是,使用Acticoat治疗的大多数患者因镇静和/或镇痛需求减少,且感染风险被认为较低,所以更早被送回家作为门诊患者接受治疗。2001年每位住院患者的纯住院成本约为67,725瑞典克朗(1瑞典克朗约合0.1欧元或0.15美元),2004年和2007年分别为30,305瑞典克朗和24,440瑞典克朗。相对于2001年的成本,这分别节省了55%和64%。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

2
A burn center cost-reduction program.一个烧伤中心成本降低项目。
J Burn Care Rehabil. 1997 Jul-Aug;18(4):358-63; discussion 357. doi: 10.1097/00004630-199707000-00016.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验