Int J Trauma Nurs 2002;8:62-4.
Int J Trauma Nurs 2002;8:62-4.
Int J Trauma Nurs 2002;8:57-8.
Int J Trauma Nurs 2002;8:48-50.
Int J Trauma Nurs 2002;8:18-20.
Purpose: To compare the thermal efficiency of 3 methods of heat-loss prevention in trauma patients undergoing resuscitation in the emergency department and the nurses' attitude toward the use of each method. Design: A quasi-experimental design was used to compare 3 interventions for heat-loss prevention: 3 prewarmed cotton blankets, a reflective blanket with a head covering over 1 prewarmed cotton blanket, and a forced—warm-air inflatable blanket. All patients (n = 298) admitted in trauma-alert status and who were not hypothermic at the time of admission were randomly assigned to 1 of the interventions. Temperatures were recorded every 15 minutes for the first hour, then hourly until the patient was transferred from the emergency department. Nurses were asked to comment on and rate each method for ease of use, convenience, and access to the patient during care. Findings: Analysis of variance results showed no significant differences in temperature change among the groups. Nurses significantly preferred the prewarmed cotton and reflective blankets to the warm-air inflatable blanket. Conclusions: The 3 modes of temperature conservation equally maintained body temperature in trauma patients who were not hypothermic on admission. The nurses surveyed had a preference for not using the more mechanical intervention. (Int J Trauma Nurs 2002;8:4-8.)
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：