期刊文献+

不同插管方式对患者心率及血压影响的临床对比分析

The Clinical Comparison of Different Intubation Modes on Patient 's Heart Rate and Blood Pressure
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的:对比快速诱导插管与清醒遗忘插管2种插管方式分别对心率、血压的影响,探讨其临床运用优略。方法:以花溪区人民医院2015年3月~2016年9月80例实施ASA的手术患者作为研究对象,对其进行随机分组,分为快速诱导插管组和清醒遗忘插管组,采用SPSS18.0软件对结果进行统计分析。结果:将两组进行对比后发现,快速诱导插管组在插管前和插管后1 min心率、血压波动明显大于清醒遗忘插管组。结论:清醒遗忘插管方式对困难气道处理、危重患者麻醉等各方面明显优于快速诱导插管,值得临床推广。 Objective: To compare the rapid induction of intubation and forgotten awake intubation two methods for intubation effect on heart rate, blood pressure, respectively, to explore the clinical use of optimal slightly. Methods: to huaxi district people's hospital in March 2015 - September 2016 80 implementation of ASA surgery patients as the research object, on the randomized, divided into rapid induction of intubation and sober forget intubation group, using SPSS18.0 software for statistical analysis of the results. Results: compare two groups and found that the rapid induction of intubation group before intubation and 1 min alter intubation is bigger than the heart rate, blood pressure fluctuations forgotten awake intubation group. Conclusion: forget awake intubation way anesthesia in patients with difficult airway processing, critically ill and so on various aspects is superior to rapid induction and intubation is worth clinical promotion.
出处 《广东化工》 CAS 2017年第8期30-30,27,共2页 Guangdong Chemical Industry
关键词 清醒遗忘 快速诱导 气管插管 心率 血压 awake forgotten rapid induction endotracheal intubation heart rate blood pressure
  • 相关文献

参考文献6

二级参考文献24

  • 1[1]Li J,Murphy-Lavoie H,Bugas C, et al.Complications of emergency intubation with and without paralysis[J].Am J Emerg Med,1999,17(2):141-143.
  • 2[2]Ma OJ,Atchley RB,Brady W, et al.Intubation success rates improve for an air medical program after implementing the use of neuromuscular blocking agents[J].Am J Emerg Med,1998,16:125-127.
  • 3[3]Olsen JC,Gurr DE,Hughes M.Video analysis of emergency medicine residents performing rapid sequence intubations[J].J of Emerg Med,2000,18(4):469-472.
  • 4[4]Sakles JC,Laurin EG,Panacek EA, et al.Rocuronium for rapid sequence intubation of emergency department patients[J].J of Emerg Med,1999,17(4):611-616.
  • 5[5]Mazurek AJ,Rae B,Cote CJ,et al.Rocuronium versus succinylcholine:are they equally effective during rapid sequence induction of anesthesia[J]? Anesth Analg,1998,87:1259-1262.
  • 6[6]Magorian T,Flannery KB,Miller RD.Comparison of rocuronium,succi-nylcholine and vecuronium for rapid sequence induction of anesthesia in adult patients[J].Anesthesiology, 1993,79:913-918.
  • 7[7]Higgins TL,Yared JP,Goodale DB,et al.Propofol versus midazolam for intensive care unit sedation after coronary artery bypass grafting[J].Crit Care Med,1994,22:1415-1423.
  • 8[8]Lebowitz PW,Cote ME,Daniels AL,et al.Comparative cardiovascular effects of midazolam and thiopental in healthy patients[J].Anesth Analg,1982,61:771-775.
  • 9[9]Wright SW,Chudnofsky CR,Borron SW,et al.Midazolam use in the emergency department[J].Am J Emerg Med,1990,8:97-100.
  • 10[10]Cernaianu AC,Delrossi AJ,Flum DR,et al.Lorazepam and midazolam in the intensive care unit:a randomized,prospective,multicenter study of hemodynamics,oxygen transport efficacy and cost[J].Crit Care Med,1996,24:222-228.

共引文献48

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部