威伐光局部照射治疗感染性伤口的临床疗效分析(1)
摘要：目的 对比观察威伐光和短波紫外线在相同治疗条件下局部照射感染性伤口的临床疗效。方法 选择2015年1月～2017年6月清创术后或创伤后感染性伤口患者80例，随机分为威伐光组和短波紫外线组，每组40 例。两组均采用直接照射感染伤口创面，威伐光组治疗时照射强度为380 mW/cm2，30 min/次，1次/d；短波紫外线组采用波长为254 nm，照射强度10 mW/cm2， 1次/d。于入组时和治疗结束后，对比观察伤口愈合情况、治疗周期，采用视觉疼痛评分(VAS)分别对两组患者进行疼痛评定。结果 两组治疗效果比较，威伐光组好于短波紫外线组，差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。分组疗效观察结果：威发光治组在深部伤口患者疗效好于短波紫外线组，同时威伐光组好转和治愈天数较短波紫外线组明显缩短，差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)；在治疗3 d、5 d、7 d后两组患者的VAS评分均有下降，但威伐光组VAS下降明显优于短波紫外线组，差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论 威伐光和短波紫外线治疗感染性伤口均有效，而威伐光的治疗效果更加显著，可以成为治疗各种感染性伤口更好的方法。
, 百拇医药
关键词：威伐光；短波紫外线；感染性伤口；理疗
中图分类号：R454 文献标识码：A 文章编号：1006-1959(2017)26-0039-04
Abstract：Objective To compare the clinical effects of Weifa light and short-wave ultraviolet radiation in the treatment of infectious wounds under the same treatment conditions.Methods From January 2015 to June 2017，80 patients with debridement wound or post-traumatic wound were randomly divided into Weifa light group and shortwave ultraviolet light group，40 cases in each group.The wounds were infected by direct irradiation in both groups.The irradiation intensity of Weifa light group was 380 mW/cm2 for 30 min/time and 1 time/d；The wavelength of UV light was 254 nm and the irradiation intensity was 10 mW/cm and 1 time/d.At the time of enrollment and after the treatment，the wound healing and the treatment cycle were compared.The visual acuity scores(VAS)were used to evaluate the pain in both groups.Results Comparison of the therapeutic effect of two groups，Weifa light group is better than the ultraviolet group，the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).The curative effect of the treatment group：The efficacy of the Weifa light group was better than that of the short-wave UV-ray in deep wound patients，at the same time Weifa light group cure days than UVB group decreased significantly，the differences were statistically significant(P<0.05)；in the treatment of 3 d，5 d，7 d after the two groups of patients with VAS score decreased，but Weifa light group VAS were lower than that of UVB group，the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05).Conclusion Weifa light and short-wave UV treatments are effective for infectious wounds，and Weifa light treatment is more effective and can be a better way to treat a variety of infectious wounds.
, 百拇医药
Key words：Weifa light；Shortwave ultraviolet light；Infectious wounds；Physical therapy
感染性傷口一般多因开放性创伤或污染手术切口并发感染引起，具有发病率高、复发率高的特点，是导致机体死亡率增高的重要原因之一，以及随之而来的抗生素的大量使用，是我国所面临的重要公共卫生问题之一[1]。既往研究显示，适当采用各种物理因子照射伤口，可以较好的促进伤口的愈合，降低伤口感染率。但是传统的理疗方法，如短波紫外线、激光等物理因子对感染性伤口效果一般[2-3]。随着医疗技术的发展，威伐光作为一种新的光子治疗已经开始在国外广泛应用，其起效快、穿透力强、杀菌效果更好，比传统的理疗方式取得了更显著地疗效[4]，但国内目前尚未见文献报道。因此，本文中我们观察了威伐光对伤口愈合、疗程和对疼痛的影响，初步探索了威伐光在治疗感染性伤口中的作用，现将结果报告如下。, http://www.100md.com(高修明 孙溪 章丽莉)
, 百拇医药
关键词：威伐光；短波紫外线；感染性伤口；理疗
中图分类号：R454 文献标识码：A 文章编号：1006-1959(2017)26-0039-04
Abstract：Objective To compare the clinical effects of Weifa light and short-wave ultraviolet radiation in the treatment of infectious wounds under the same treatment conditions.Methods From January 2015 to June 2017，80 patients with debridement wound or post-traumatic wound were randomly divided into Weifa light group and shortwave ultraviolet light group，40 cases in each group.The wounds were infected by direct irradiation in both groups.The irradiation intensity of Weifa light group was 380 mW/cm2 for 30 min/time and 1 time/d；The wavelength of UV light was 254 nm and the irradiation intensity was 10 mW/cm and 1 time/d.At the time of enrollment and after the treatment，the wound healing and the treatment cycle were compared.The visual acuity scores(VAS)were used to evaluate the pain in both groups.Results Comparison of the therapeutic effect of two groups，Weifa light group is better than the ultraviolet group，the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).The curative effect of the treatment group：The efficacy of the Weifa light group was better than that of the short-wave UV-ray in deep wound patients，at the same time Weifa light group cure days than UVB group decreased significantly，the differences were statistically significant(P<0.05)；in the treatment of 3 d，5 d，7 d after the two groups of patients with VAS score decreased，but Weifa light group VAS were lower than that of UVB group，the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05).Conclusion Weifa light and short-wave UV treatments are effective for infectious wounds，and Weifa light treatment is more effective and can be a better way to treat a variety of infectious wounds.
, 百拇医药
Key words：Weifa light；Shortwave ultraviolet light；Infectious wounds；Physical therapy
感染性傷口一般多因开放性创伤或污染手术切口并发感染引起，具有发病率高、复发率高的特点，是导致机体死亡率增高的重要原因之一，以及随之而来的抗生素的大量使用，是我国所面临的重要公共卫生问题之一[1]。既往研究显示，适当采用各种物理因子照射伤口，可以较好的促进伤口的愈合，降低伤口感染率。但是传统的理疗方法，如短波紫外线、激光等物理因子对感染性伤口效果一般[2-3]。随着医疗技术的发展，威伐光作为一种新的光子治疗已经开始在国外广泛应用，其起效快、穿透力强、杀菌效果更好，比传统的理疗方式取得了更显著地疗效[4]，但国内目前尚未见文献报道。因此，本文中我们观察了威伐光对伤口愈合、疗程和对疼痛的影响，初步探索了威伐光在治疗感染性伤口中的作用，现将结果报告如下。, http://www.100md.com(高修明 孙溪 章丽莉)