發(fā)布時間：2018-04-14 06:03

  本文選題：普通聽診器 + 衛(wèi)生飛機�。� 參考：《空軍醫(yī)學(xué)雜志》2016年06期

【摘要】：目的對高空噪音環(huán)境中傳統(tǒng)普通聽診器和抗噪電子聽診器的心臟聽診效果進行對比分析,評估抗噪電子聽診器和傳統(tǒng)普通聽診器在運8-C衛(wèi)生飛機平飛階段心臟聽診的效果。方法預(yù)先將正規(guī)醫(yī)學(xué)網(wǎng)站上下載正常心音和主動脈關(guān)閉不全的異常心音,存儲于平板電腦中,在地面和運8-C衛(wèi)生飛機平飛2個階段,播放正常心音和異常心音,由39名臨床醫(yī)師依次選取傳統(tǒng)普通聽診器和抗噪電子聽診器進行聽診,依據(jù)醫(yī)師聽診結(jié)果來評估聽診效果(聽診正確、聽診錯誤或未聽到)。使用χ2檢驗完成對所得數(shù)據(jù)的統(tǒng)計分析。結(jié)果在地面階段,無論是普通聽診器還是抗噪聽診器均可以100%聽清,在運8-C衛(wèi)生飛機平飛階段,抗噪電子聽診器(3M)聽診正常心音(正確率71.79%,P0.01)和異常心音(正確率61.54%,P0.01)的效果均顯著優(yōu)于傳統(tǒng)普通聽診器(正確率分別為2.56%和0),抗噪聽診器對正常心音和異常心音未聽到比例分別為15.38%和28.2%(P0.01),明顯低于普通聽診器(未聽到比例分別為97.44%和100%,P0.01)。結(jié)論通過對39名臨床醫(yī)師在地面和高空飛行轉(zhuǎn)運途中,對正常心音和異常心音聽診結(jié)果分析,表明在地面使用普通聽診器和電子抗噪聽診器均可清晰聽見正常心音和異常心音,但在運8-C衛(wèi)生飛機平飛階段,空中噪音達(101.34±3.47)d B時,抗噪電子聽診器聽診正常心音(正確率為71.79%,P0.01)和異常心音(正確率為61.54%,P0.01),而普通聽診器在平飛階段,幾乎100%聽不到,可見抗噪聽診器效果均顯著優(yōu)于傳統(tǒng)普通聽診器,為醫(yī)護人員在空運后送過程中評估傷員病情提供更多依據(jù),值得推廣和應(yīng)用。
[Abstract]:Objective to compare the cardiac auscultation effect of conventional stethoscope and anti-noise electronic stethoscope in high-altitude noise environment, and to evaluate the effect of anti-noise-electronic stethoscope and conventional stethoscope in the level flight stage of 8-C sanitary aircraft.Methods normal heart sounds and abnormal heart sounds of aortic insufficiency were downloaded from the regular medical website in advance and stored in a tablet computer. The normal heart sounds and abnormal heart sounds were played on the ground and in the plane flight of 8-C sanitary aircraft.Traditional stethoscope and anti-noise electronic stethoscope were selected by 39 clinicians in turn, and the results of auscultation were evaluated according to the results of auscultation (auscultation was correct, auscultation was wrong or not heard).蠂 2 test was used to analyze the data.Results in the ground stage, both the general stethoscope and the anti-noise stethoscope were 100% audible, while the 8-C sanitary aircraft were flying flat.The results of normal cardiac sound (correct rate 71.79) and abnormal heart sound (correct rate 61.54 / P 0.01) were significantly better than those of the conventional stethoscope (2.56% and 0%, respectively), and the anti-noise stethoscope had no effect on normal heart sound and abnormal heart sound.The rates of hearing were 15.38% and 28.2% respectively, which were significantly lower than those of the general stethoscope (97.44% and 100% respectively).Conclusion the results of auscultation of normal heart sounds and abnormal heart sounds of 39 clinicians on the ground and high altitude were analyzed. The results showed that normal heart sounds and abnormal heart sounds could be heard clearly by using ordinary stethoscopes and electronic anti-noise stethoscopes on the ground.However, when the air noise reached 101.34 鹵3.47dB in the horizontal flight phase of the 8-C sanitary aircraft, the anti-noise electronic stethoscope detected the normal heart sound (the correct rate was 71.79) and the abnormal heart sound (the correct rate was 61.54 / P 0.01), while the ordinary stethoscope could hardly hear the normal heart sound in the flat flight phase, while the normal stethoscope could not hear the normal heart sound (the correct rate was 71.79g / P0.01), while the normal stethoscope could not hear it in the flat flight phase.It can be seen that the anti-noise stethoscope is significantly better than the conventional stethoscope, which provides more basis for medical staff to evaluate the condition of the wounded in the process of air evacuation, and is worth popularizing and applying.
【作者單位】： 空軍總醫(yī)院全軍臨床航空醫(yī)學(xué)中心;
【分類號】：R85

【相似文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 陳朝元;;三種新型電子醫(yī)療儀器簡介[J];福建醫(yī)藥雜志;1984年01期

，

本文編號：1748011