不同气道湿化方法用于气管插管患者的效果比较

The Efficacy of Ddifferent Airway Humidification Methods in Patients with Intratracheal Intubation

目的探讨气管插管患者应用不同气道湿化方法的效果。方法选择气管插管且不需要机械通气治疗的患者120例,按入院先后顺序分为三组,A组(精密输液器组)、B组(低流量持续雾化组)、C组(一次性MR850湿化系统双加热式呼吸机湿化管道组)。分别评估各组患者气道痰液粘稠度的变化;肺部感染发生率;记录各组3d平均日护理工时及湿化所需日医疗费用。结果在分泌物性状控制、护理工时方面,C组较另外两组有显著优势,B组优于A组;C组花费最多;各组的肺部感染率无统计学差异。结论一次性MR850湿化系统双加热式呼吸机湿化管道湿化更适用于气管插管患者,是理想的气道湿化方法。

Objective To evaluate the ef icacy of three airway humidification methods in patients with Intratracheal Intubation.Methods Totally 120 cerebral disease patients with Intratracheal intubation and do not require mechanical ventilation were randomly divided into three groups according to the order of admission.A(Precision I.V.Flow Control Device group),B(low-flow continuous atomization group),C(MR850 humidifying device group).The change of airway secretions,pulmonary infection incidence,nursing hours and medical expense within three days were recorded and compared between the three groups.Results Group C was superior in airway secretion and nursing hours compared to group B and group A.The expense was highest in group C.The pulmonary infection incidence during three groups was no significant difference.Conclusion MR850 humidifying device is more suitable for patients with intratracheal intubation.It is an ideal airway humidification method.