Therapeutic Effect of Continuous Blood Purification Combined with Humanized Nursing in Patients with Severe Sepsis

Abstract

This work aimed to explore the effect of humanized nursing on the patients’ recovery from severe sepsis based on continuous blood purification (CBP). 90 patients with severe sepsis were randomly and equally divided into a control group (basic intensive nursing + CBP) and a therapy group (humanized nursing + CBP). Before treatment and on the 7th and 14th days after treatment, indicators of patients were compared, including white blood cell (WBC), tumor necrosis factor (TNF-α), hepatic and renal function, C-reactive protein (CRP), brain natriuretic peptide (BNP), procalcitonin (PCT), and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR). The mortality and nursing satisfaction were compared. After treatment, the saturation of pulse oxygen (SPO2) in the therapy group (85 ± 20 and 91 ± 9) was higher than that in the control group (78 ± 28 and 82 ± 18, respectively), and the lactic acid level (LAL) was greatly lower (2.8 ± 2.4 and 1.6 ± 0.9 vs. 4.3 ± 2.3 and 2.3 ± 2.7). The Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE-II) score after treatment was lower (13.67 ± 4.28 and 8.45 ± 5.12 vs. 17.34 ± 6.4 and 11.46 ± 4.23). The BNP, blood urea nitrogen (BUN), and CRP levels were decreased, and so did inflammatory indicators. The survival rate reached 71% and 47% in the therapy group and control group, respectively; and the nursing satisfaction was 97.80% and 26.67%, respectively. Humanized nursing combined with CBP could improve the therapeutic effect and speed up the recovery from severe sepsis.

Retracted: Therapeutic Effect of Continuous Blood Purification Combined with Humanized Nursing in Patients with Severe Sepsis

“…Tis article has been retracted by Hindawi following an investigation undertaken by the publisher [1]. Tis investigation has uncovered evidence of one or more of the following indicators of systematic manipulation of the publication process:…”

“…This article has been retracted by Hindawi following an investigation undertaken by the publisher [ 1 ]. This investigation has uncovered evidence of one or more of the following indicators of systematic manipulation of the publication process: Discrepancies in scope Discrepancies in the description of the research reported Discrepancies between the availability of data and the research described Inappropriate citations Incoherent, meaningless and/or irrelevant content included in the article Peer-review manipulation …”