Chandratreya A, Giannikas K, Livesley P
King's Mill Centre, Sutton-in-Ashfield, Nottinghamshire.
J R Coll Surg Edinb. 1998 Dec;43(6):404-6.
To evaluate the current use, of and opinion regarding the use of closed suction drains in orthopaedic practice, a literature review and two surveys have been conducted. Recent literature suggests that there is no difference in terms of wound healing, post-operative pyrexia, range of motion, seroma collection, days of hospitalization and infection rate in drained and undrained groups in routine orthopaedic procedures. In the first survey, a questionnaire was sent to all members of the British Orthopaedic Association, to establish the incidence of the use of drains, their placement and the usual duration of drainage. In the second survey, all the orthopaedic consultants of the Mid-Trent Region were interviewed to establish their reasons for using drains. Both surveys indicate that drains are used routinely by the majority of orthopaedic surgeons regardless of the published literature. We conclude that most orthopaedic surgeons in the United Kingdom do not practice 'evidence-based medicine' with regards to wound drainage.
为评估闭式吸引引流管在骨科实践中的当前使用情况、使用情况及相关意见，我们进行了一项文献综述和两项调查。近期文献表明，在常规骨科手术中，引流组和未引流组在伤口愈合、术后发热、活动范围、血清肿形成、住院天数及感染率方面并无差异。在第一项调查中，我们向英国骨科协会的所有成员发送了一份问卷，以确定引流管的使用发生率、放置位置及通常的引流持续时间。在第二项调查中，我们采访了中特伦特地区的所有骨科顾问，以确定他们使用引流管的原因。两项调查均表明，尽管有已发表的文献，但大多数骨科外科医生仍常规使用引流管。我们得出结论，英国的大多数骨科外科医生在伤口引流方面并未践行“循证医学”。
