Comparison of the Clinical Effects of Two Chest Drainage Devices for Thoracoscopic Lung Surgeries

Objective: To compare the clinical efficacy of a digital drainage device versus a new drainage bag for pleural drainage after thoracoscopic lung surgery. Methods: This quasiexperimental two-group study involved one hundred patients assigned to the digital drainage device or the new drainage bag. After thoracoscopic lung resection, air leakage and drainage were evaluated until the chest tube was removed. The outcome criteria included chest tube indwelling and hospitalization days, as well as patient and nurse satisfaction. The data were statistically analyzed using chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests. Results: There were no significant differences in the duration of chest tube indwelling (2.36 ± 1.53 days vs 1.96 ± 1.22 days, p=.153) or postoperative hospital stay (3.72 ±1.65 days vs 3.18 ± 1.54 days, p=.095) between the two groups. However, the scores of the patients (4.86 ± 0.34 vs. 3.82 ±0.98, p<.001) and their levels of nurse satisfaction (4.38± 0.717 vs. 3.07 ± 0.979 p<.001) were significantly greater in the new drainage bag group than in the digital device group. Conclusion: The effect of the new drainage bag system is equivalent to that of the digital drain system in terms of days of chest tube dwelling and hospital stay, and the new drainage bag system is more cost effective. Patient and nurse satisfaction with the new draining bag system is superior to that with the digital system in terms of convenience, ease of care, and promotion of early mobilization, proficiency, and efficiency.