...
首页> 外文期刊>The Journal of laryngology and otology. >A randomized prospective trial to compare four different ear packs following permeatal middle ear surgery.
【24h】

A randomized prospective trial to compare four different ear packs following permeatal middle ear surgery.

机译:一项通透性中耳手术后比较四种不同耳包的随机前瞻性试验。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Surgeons choice of an ear pack is dictated by availability, previous training and personal preference. There has been no recent prospective study evaluating the use of different types of ear packs. This randomized prospective study compares the use of BIPP impregnated ribbon gauze (Aurum), Pope wicks (Xomed-Teace), silastic sheeting (Dow Corning) and tri-adcortyl ointment (Squibb) as an ear dressing following 'clear' middle ear procedures via a permeatal approach. The results showed that there was no statistically significant difference in post-operative pain and discomfort experienced, neither was there any significant difference regarding the otolaryngologist's assessment of the degree of canal granulation, stenosis or discharge with the above named packs. This study concludes that non-traditional dressings such as tri-adcortyl ointment or simply a thin silastic sheet placed on the drum are no worse than time honoured BIPP. They have, as well, the advantage of being well-tolerated by the patients.
机译:外科医生对耳包的选择取决于可用性,先前的培训和个人喜好。最近没有前瞻性研究评估不同类型的耳包的使用。这项随机前瞻性研究比较了BIPP浸渍的缎带纱布(Aurum),Pope wicks(Xomed-Teace),硅橡胶片(Dow Corning)和三去甲油膏(Squibb)作为“透明”中耳手术后的敷料的用途通透的方法。结果表明,在使用上述包装的情况下,术后疼痛和不适在统计学上无显着差异,耳鼻喉科医生对运河肉芽,狭窄或排出程度的评估也没有任何显着差异。这项研究得出的结论是,非传统的敷料,例如三去甲油膏或简单地放在鼓上的薄硅橡胶片,都不会比久负盛名的BIPP差。它们还具有被患者良好耐受的优点。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号