论文部分内容阅读
目的:比较非机械通气患者人工气道三种不同湿化方式的湿化效果,解决中度海拔、低氧、寒冷、干燥特殊气候条件下非机械通气、人工气道患者的气道湿化问题,以选择有效的湿化方式。方法:选取建立人工气道非机械通气氧疗患者306例,将所选患者随机分为人工鼻吸氧组100例,持续雾化吸氧组103例,持续恒温湿化吸氧组103例,比较三组患者痰液黏稠度、是否气道痰痂形成、是否气道黏膜损伤出血、是否有气道高反应性、肺部感染发生率、日吸痰次数、ICU住院日。结果:C组各项指标均优于B组和A组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:持续恒温湿化吸氧湿化效果较好,持续雾化吸氧湿化效果次之,人工鼻吸氧湿化效果最差。
OBJECTIVE: To compare the humidification effects of three different humidification modes of artificial airway in patients with non-mechanical ventilation and to solve the problem of airway humidification in patients with non-mechanical ventilation and artificial airway under moderate altitude, hypoxia, cold and dry special climatic conditions , To choose an effective wet method. Methods: A total of 306 patients with artificial airway non-mechanical ventilation oxygen therapy were selected. The patients were randomly divided into artificial nasal inhalation group (n = 100), continuous aerosol inhalation group (n = 103) The sputum viscosity, airway sputum scab formation, airway mucosal lesion bleeding, airway hyperresponsiveness, incidence of pulmonary infection, number of sputum aspiration and ICU stay were compared between the three groups. Results: The indexes in group C were better than those in group B and group A (P <0.05). CONCLUSION: Continuous constant temperature humidification has better effect of oxygen absorption and humidification, followed by continuous atomization and oxygen absorption and humidification followed by artificial nasal oxygen humidification.