论文部分内容阅读
目的：比较应用RASS及Ramsay评分监测ICU机械通气患者镇静效果，评估RASS应用于ICU镇静的疗效分析。方法选择吉林大学第四医院ICU收治的机械通气患者100例，随机分为RASS组与Ramsay组。分别应用RASS与Ramsay镇静评分指导镇静治疗，记录每组患者的人机对抗、意外拔管、低血压发生例次，机械通气总时间、ICU住院时间及30 d病死率。结果与Ramsay组相比，RASS组患者出现人机对抗、意外拔管及低血压比例明显降低（P<0.05），而机械通气总时间、ICU住院时间及30 d病死率2组间差异无统计学差异。结论 RASS是一种客观评估镇静的评分系统，相对传统的Ramsay镇静评分更加客观、准确。“,”Objective RASS and Ramsay were respectively distributed to monitor the efficacy of the sedation, to evaluate the value of RASS in the sedation of ventilated patients in ICU. Method Ventilated patients 100 cases, in ICU department of the Fourth Hospital of Jilin University from July 2012 to December 2014, were randomly divided into 2 groups, RASS was applied to group RASS for guiding treatment and Ramsay in group Ramsay . The cases of Human-machine against, unexpectedly drawn tubes and hypotension were recorded, also the duration time of ventilation ,days in hospital and 30-day death rates. Results The Human- machine against, unexpectedly drawn tubes and hypotension were significantly lower proportion in group RASS, and there was no statistical difference in the duration time of ventilation, days in hospital and 30-day death rates between the 2 groups. Conclusions As a scoring system for sedation, RASS was more Objective and effective than Ramsay.