压缩泵和超声雾化吸入疗法治疗小儿哮喘疗效对比

Comparison of the Efficacy between Compression Pump and Ultrasonic Nebulization for Children with Asthma

目的比较压缩泵和超声雾化吸入疗法治疗小儿哮喘的临床疗效。方法选择2013年4月至2014年4月开县人民医院儿内科收治的90例哮喘患儿作为研究对象,按照随机数字表法分为压缩泵雾化吸入组和超声雾化吸入组,各45例。压缩泵雾化吸入组给予5 mg/2.5 m L硫酸沙丁胺醇溶液联合1 mg/2 m L布地奈德混悬液压缩泵雾化吸入,每次10 min,每日2次,连续治疗7 d;超声雾化吸入组给予5 mg/2.5 m L硫酸沙丁胺醇溶液联合1 mg/2 m L布地奈德混悬液超声雾化吸入,每次30 min,每日2次,连续治疗7 d。观察治疗后两组患儿的呼吸频率、心率、血氧饱和度指标,并比较两种方法的疗效。结果压缩泵雾化吸入组治疗后的呼吸频率、心率、血氧饱和度分别为(34±5)次/min、(130±12)次/min、0.72±0.03,与超声雾化吸入组的(38±6)次/min、(139±16)次/min、0.53±0.03相比,差异均有统计学意义(t=2.871,2.971,8.562,P<0.01)。超声雾化吸入组显效12例、有效24例、无效9例,总有效率为80.0%;压缩泵雾化吸入组显效23例、有效20例、无效2例,总有效率为95.6%,两组临床疗效比较差异有统计学意义(Z=3.829,P<0.05)。结论在小儿哮喘治疗中,压缩泵雾化吸入疗法的临床效果明显优于超声雾化吸入疗法,值得推荐。

Objective To compare the clinical efficacy of compression pump and ultrasonic nebulization inhalation therapy for the pediatric asthma. Methods Total of 90 cases of pediatric asthma admitted to the People＇s Hospital of Kaixian County from Apr. 2013 to Apr. 2014 were divided into compression pump atomization inhalation group and ultrasonic nebulization inhalation group according to random number table method,45 cases each. The compression pump atomization inhalation group was given 5 mg /2. 5 m L of salbutamol sulphate joint1 mg /2 m L of budesonide inhalation by compression pump,10 min / time,2 times / d,for 7 days. The ultrasonic nebulization inhalation group was given 5 mg /2. 5 m L of salbutamol sulphate joint 1 mg /2 m L of budesonide inhalation by ultrasound inhalation,30 min / time,2 times / d,for 7 days. The children＇ s breathing rate,heart rate,blood oxygen saturation index and the curative effect of the two groups were compared after treatment.Results After treatment,the respiratory rate,heart rate,oxygen saturation index of pediatric asthma in the compression pump atomization inhalation group were（ 34 ± 5） beats / min,（ 130 ± 12） beats / min,0. 72 ± 0. 03,which were all better than that in the ultrasonic nebulization inhalation group which were（ 38 ± 6） beats / min,（ 139 ± 16） beats/min,0. 53 ± 0. 03,the differences were all statistically significant（ t = 2. 871,2. 971,8. 562,P〈0. 01）. In the ultrasonic nebulization inhalation group,12 children were cured,24 children were effective,9 children were ineffective,the total effective rate was 80. 0%. In the compression pump atomization inhalation group,23 children were cured,20 children were effective,2 children were ineffective,the total effective rate was95. 6%. There was a statistically significant difference between the two groups（ Z = 3. 829,P〈0. 05）. Conclusion In clinical efficacy of pediatric asthma,the compression pump atomization inhalation therapy is obvious better than ultrasonic atomization inhalation therapy,thus is worth to be recommended.