论文部分内容阅读
目的:分析比较不同时期住院慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性加重(AECOPD)患者氧驱雾化吸入治疗的区别。方法:选择2016年1月1日至12月31日和2019年1月1日至12月31日在首都医科大学附属北京天坛医院呼吸与危重症医学科普通病房住院的AECOPD患者180例，按住院年份分为2016年组(n n＝102)、2019年组(n n＝78)，采用回顾性研究比较2组氧驱雾化吸入的使用率及联合雾化吸入药物的构成比、使用比率、用药量，并比较2组的住院时间。n 结果:2组总的氧驱雾化吸入比率、联合雾化吸入药物构成、异丙托溴铵、乙酰半胱氨酸使用比率及乙酰半胱氨酸用药量差异均有统计学意义(n P值均0.05)，2组住院时间差异有统计学意义(n Z＝2.51，n P<0.05)。n 结论:氧驱雾化吸入在住院AECOPD患者中受到普遍重视，以多药联合雾化吸入治疗为主，异丙托溴铵及乙酰半胱氨酸使用率明显增高，2019年平均住院日较2016年缩短可能与多药联合雾化吸入有关。“,”Objective:To compare and analyze the difference of oxygen-driven nebulization therapy for inpatients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) in different periods.Methods:A total of 180 patients with AECOPD who were hospitalized in the general ward of the Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2016 and from January 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019 were selected.They were divided into two groups according to the year of hospitalization.A retrospective study method was used to compare the use ratio of oxygen-driven nebulization, the composition ratio, use ratio and dosage of combined nebulization drugs in the two groups, and to compare the average hospitalization days of the two groups.Results:There were differences in the total oxygen-driven nebulization ratio, combined nebulization drug composition, ipratropium bromide, acetylcysteine use ratio, and acetylcysteine dosage (all n P0.05), but there was significant difference in the average hospital stay between the two groups (n Z=2.51, n P<0.05).n Conclusions:Oxygen-driven nebulization therapy has been paid more and more attention in AECOPD inpatients, mainly multi-drug nebulization.Ipratropium bromide and acetylcysteine use ratio has been increased significantly, the average hospital stay in 2019 is shorter than that in 2016 may be related to multi-drug nebulization therapy.