Objective To compare the clinical value of implanted venous access port(VAP)versus peripherally inserted central catheter(PICC)in the care of patients with hematologic tumor,and to provide references for patients to choose central venous administration during chemotherapy.Methods Eighty patients with hematologic tumor treated in the Affiliated Hospital of Hebei Engineering University from March 2021 to February 2023 were selected and assigned into VPA group(n=38)and PICC group(n=42)according to the catheter placement methods.The scores of complications,comfort and quality of life were compared between the two groups.Results There were no complications including ductal obstruction,bloodstream infection,skin allergy of VPA group,the incidence of complications of VPA group was significantly lower than that of PICC group(5.26％vs 26.19％,P＜0.05).The difference was not statistically significant in quality of life(social function)score between groups,the scores of the five dimensions of quality of life in VPA group were significantly higher than those of PICC group(P＜0.05).The comfort score of VPA group was significantly higher than that of PICC group(P＜0.05).Conclusion Compared with PICC,VPA has fewer complications and better comfort,which can improve patients'quality of life and meet the long-term treatment needs of patients with hematologic tumor,and worthy of clinical promotion.
implanted venous access portperipherally inserted central catheter(PICC)hematologic tumor
维普
万方数据
