不同雾化吸入方式治疗小儿哮喘的效果评价

目的探索不同雾化吸入方式治疗小儿哮喘的效果评价。方法选取我院自2007年10月～2009年10月收治的需施行雾化吸入方式治疗的小儿哮喘患者60例,随机分为两组。30例应用非诺特罗氢溴化物加溴化异丙托品驱动雾化吸入方式作为实验组,另选取同时期的30例病例应用支气管舒张药雾化吸入方式作为对照组,对比两组的临床治疗效果。结果通过对雾化吸入方式治疗小儿哮喘的效果评价,实验组中显效18例,有效7例,无效5例,治愈后反复发作9例,并发症发生率为19.7%;而对照组中显效15例,有效7例,无效8例,治愈后反复发作13例,并发症发生率为35.8%,两组比较差异显著(P<0.01)。结论在现代儿童医学小儿哮喘的临床治疗中,不同雾化吸入方式治理技术的应用均具有治疗效果明显,副作用小等优点。另外,雾化吸入方式的临床治疗效果取决于吸入方法、雾粒直径、药物浓度,以及雾化器性能等因素,必须根据需要沉积在相应部位才能达到有效的治疗作用。

Objective Explore different ways inhalation Evaluation of treatment of children with asthma. Methods See our hospital from October 2007-October 2009 admitted to the needs of the purposes of inhalation ways of asthmatic children treated 60 patients, 30 patients were treated with hydrogen bromide, fenoterol plus ipratropium bromide aerosol drive inhalation method as the experimental group, while the other selected applications of 30 cases inhalation bronchodilator medicine way as the control group, compared two groups of clinical treatment. Results Way through the inhalation treatment of children with asthma Evaluation of the experimental group, 18 cases markedly effective in 7 cases, ineffective in 5 cases, 9 cases were cured, recurrent, complication rate was 19.7%; while the control group, 15 cases marked , 7 cases, 8 cases, 13 cases were cured, recurrent, complication rate was 35.8%, the difference was significant （P〈0.01）. Conclusion Children in modern medical treatment of children with asthma, inhalation of different ways the application of control technology has therapeutic effects were evident, with little side effect. In addition, the inhalation form of clinical treatment depends on the inhalation method, fog particle diameter, drug concentration, and the atomizer performance and other factors, must be deposited in the appropriate location as needed to achieve the therapeutic effect.