English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Introduction: The history of intravenous therapy began with the discovery by Sir. Williams Harvey. The first practical application was by Dr. Thomas Latta, who used infusion of saline to treat the intractable diarrhea. Approximately 90% of patients in acute care setting receive some form of intravenous infusion therapy. Over one fourth of hospitalized patients receive intravenous therapy for fluid replacement and administration of drugs. It is also recognized that intravenous therapy exposes the patient to a considerable variety of hazards and less commonly to grave danger. The incidence of superficial thrombophlebitis is related to with the length of time, I.V. line in place, composition of fluid or medication infused, size of the cannula and the site of insertion, improper anchoring of the line and the introduction of microorganisms at the time of insertion.Methods research approach: Pre-experimental research design (one group pretest–postest design) was used Here in this study two groups were taken and observed after the independent variable were introduced (application of warm compress and magnesium sulphate on superficial thrombophlebitis). The setting for this study was the selected area of hospital at Ambikapur, Chhattishgarh. Sample were selected by using purposive sampling technique and then assigned into two groups; Group –A and group-B. The Pre–test was taken using a semi structured superficial thrombophlebitis scale, selected socio-demographic and clinical variables. Following the pre- test interventions were carried out for both groups. Warm compress application was given to group-A for 20 minutes and magnesium sulphate application was given to group-B by dipping the gauze in the solution and applied on superficial thrombophlebitis, which was applied till next dressing change. Study comprised of 60 patients (Group A-30 Patient & Group B-30 patient) with superficial thrombophlebitis. Semi- structured questionnaire was used for collecting the data. It consists of tools.Section A: Selected Socio-demographic profileSection B: Selected clinical variables profileSection C: Semi- structured superficial Thrombophlebitis scaleSemi-structured superficial thrombophlebitis scale, selected socio-demographic and clinical questions were submitted to seven experts in the field of medical surgical nursing, expert were selected on the basis of their clinical expertise, experience and interest in the problem being selected. Tool validity was done and tool found reliable. The reliability coefficient was calculated by using karl Pearson formula to determine reliability coefficient. The value of ‘r’ was found 0.98, hence the tool was reliable. Study found feasible after pilot study.Result: Sample characteristic were analysed by using frequency and percentage. Mean, mean difference and standard deviation and ‘t’ test were done for analysing the effectiveness of warm compression and magnesium sulphate application on superficial thrombophlebitis. Chi-square test was computed to determine the association between the selected clinical variables in both group. The comparison between warm compress application and magnesium sulphate application was found by using paired ‘t’ test which showed The calculated ‘t’ value 22.22 and 8.9 respectively is greater than table value (t59=2.00). Mean difference of pre-test and post-test score of Group A (1.8) is greater than mean difference of pre-test post- test - score of group-B(1). This shows that there is significant difference between warm compress and magnesium sulphate application in reducing the superficial thrombophlebitis at 0.05 level of significance.Conclusion: Significant reduction in superficial thrombophlebitis with warm compress application and magnesium sulphate application, which shows that both interventions are effective in reducing the signs and symptoms of superficial thrombophlebitis. Significant difference between the effect of warm compress and magnesium sulphate application, which shows that warm compress application is more effective than magnesium sulphate application on superficial thrombophlebitis.

international journal of applied research

A comparative study to assess the effectiveness of warm compress vs magnesium sulphate application on superficial thrombophlebitis among patients admitted in a selected hospital at Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh