标题：仿生物电技术对妇科腹腔镜围手术期患者胃肠道功能和膀胱功能恢复的影响

      作者：方巧婵，陈春霞，黄梁淘    东莞市厚街医院妇产科，广东 东莞 523960

      卷次： 2021年32卷12期

      【摘要】 目的 探讨仿生物电技术对妇科腹腔镜围手术期患者胃肠道功能和膀胱功能恢复的影响。方法 选取2018年5月至2019年6月在东莞市厚街医院妇产科行妇科腹腔镜手术患者100例，根据入院单双号将患者分为观察组和对照组各50例，对照组患者给予常规围手术期干预，观察组患者在对照组基础上进行仿生物电技术干预，两组均干预7 d。采用视觉模拟疼痛(VAS)评分法分别于术后6 h、12 h、24 h比较两组患者术后疼痛，记录胃肠道和膀胱功能恢复情况、不良反应,采用SF-36量表于术后7 d评估患者生活质量。结果 两组患者术后6 h的VAS评分比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)；观察组患者术后12 h、24 h的 VAS评分分别为(5.33±0.59)分、(4.05±0.39)分，明显低于对照组的(7.12±0.73)分、(6.16±0.84)分，差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)；观察组术后首次肛门排气时间、首次排便时间、肠鸣音恢复时间、腹胀缓解时间分别为(2.16±0.25) d、(2.28±0.21) d、(1.27±0.18) d、(1.07±0.32) d，明显短于对照组的(2.47±0.27) d、(2.90±0.30) d、(1.64±0.20) d、(1.35±0.40) d，差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)；观察组患者的不良反应发生率为16.0%，明显低于对照组的34.0%，差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)；观察组患者术后7 d的生理功能、生理职能、活力、精神健康、躯体疼痛、总体健康评分分别为(49.95±5.06)分、(53.74±6.51)分、(60.13±6.28)分、(57.50±7.23)分、(61.83±7.09)分、(62.45±7.68)分，明显高于对照组的(38.47±6.68)分、(47.36±5.19)分、(55.27±6.14)分、(51.15±7.46)分、(54.17±7.33)分、(57.39±8.13)分，差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)，但两组患者的情感职能、社会功能评分比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 在妇科腹腔镜围手术期应用仿生物电技术可明显改善患者术后疼痛，促进其胃肠道功能和膀胱功能恢复，减少不良反应发生，提高其生活质量。
      【关键词】 仿生物电技术；妇科腹腔镜手术；围术期；胃肠道功能；膀胱功能；疼痛
      【中图分类号】 R713 【文献标识码】 A 【文章编号】 1003—6350（2021）12—1568—04

Effect of bio-electric technology on the recovery of gastrointestinal function and bladder function in patientsundergoing gynecological laparoscopic operation during the perioperative period.
FANG Qiao-chan, CHENChun-xia, HUANG Liang-tao, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Dongguan Houjie Hospital, Dongguan 523960,Guangdong, CHINA
【Abstract】 Objective To investigate the effect of bio-electric technology on the recovery of gastrointestinalfunction and bladder function in patients undergoing gynecological laparoscopic operation during the perioperative peri-od. Methods A total of 100 patients who underwent gynecological laparoscopic operation in the Department of Obstet-rics and Gynecology at Dongguan Houjie Hospital from May 2018 to June 2019 were enrolled in the study. According tothe even/odd numbers arranged at hospital admission, the patients were divided into an observation group and a controlgroup with 50 cases in each group. Patients in the control group were given routine perioperative intervention, and pa-tients in the observation group were given bio-electric technology intervention on the basis of the control group. Bothgroups were treated for 7 days. The visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to compare the postoperative pain of the twogroups at 6 h, 12 h, and 24 h after the operation, the recovery of gastrointestinal, and bladder function, and the adverse re-actions were recorded. The 36-item short form survey (SF-36) was used to evaluate the patients’quality of life at 7 d af-ter operation. Results There was no significant difference in VAS score between the two groups at 6 h after operation(P>0.05). The VAS scores at 12 h and 24 h after operation were (5.33±0.59) points and (4.05±0.39) points in the observa-tion group, respectively, which were significantly lower than corresponding (7.12±0.73) points and (6.16±0.84) points inthe control group (P<0.05). The postoperative first anal exhaust time, first defecation time, bowel sound recovery time,and abdominal distension relief time were all significantly shorter in the observation group than in the control group: thefirst anal exhaust time (2.16±0.25) d vs (2.47±0.27) d, P<0.05; the first defecation time (2.28±0.21) d vs (2.90±0.30) d, P<0.05; the bowel sound recovery time (1.27±0.18) d vs (1.64±0.20) d, P<0.05; and the abdominal distension relief time(1.07±0.32) d vs (1.35±0.40) d, P<0.05. The incidence of adverse reactions was 16.0% in the observation group, whichwas significantly lower than 34.0% in the control group (P<0.05). The scores of physiological function, physiologicalrole, vitality, mental health, physical pain, and overall health were significantly higher in the observation group than inthe control group, i.e. physiological function (49.95 ± 5.06) points vs (38.47 ± 6.68) points, P<0.05; physiological role(53.74±6.51) points vs (47.36±5.19) points, P<0.05; vitality (60.13±6.28) points vs (55.27±