家庭雾化吸入治疗慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性发作的疗效观察

Therapeutic effect of home atomization inhalation in treatment of acute attack of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

目的探讨家庭雾化吸入在治疗慢性阻塞性肺病(COPD)急性发作中的应用效果。方法 96例COPD患者分为A组和B组,A组出院后COPD急性发作时采用家庭雾化吸入治疗,B组采用口服氨茶碱等支气管扩张剂治疗或在门诊短期或间断接受雾化吸入治疗。比较2组1年内门急诊就诊、住院、发病及应用全身糖皮质激素和抗生素治疗情况。结果 A组随访1年中门急诊就诊患者35(67.31%)例、住院10(19.23%)例、发病天数(15.01±4.81)d、9(17.31%)例患者应用全身糖皮质激素治疗、34例(65.38%)患者应用了抗生素治疗。B组分别为34(77.27%)例、14(31.82%)例、(33.01±11.51)d、13(29.55%)例和40(90.91%)例。2组抗生素应用情况及发病天数差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论家庭雾化吸入是一种治疗COPD急性发作时安全、有效的方法,值得推广应用。

Objective To explore the therapeutic effect and safety of home atomization inhalation in treatment of acute attack of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease（ COPD）. Methods Totally ninety-six patients with acute attack of COPD were divided into two group A（ n = 52） and group B（ n = 44）. In the group A,patients were given home family atomization inhalation in acute attack period of COPD. In the group B,patients were given pharmacotherapy or short-term atomization inhalation in outpatient clinic. The rate of re-hospitalization and using glucocorticoid and antibiotics,medical costs were assessed and compared between two groups. Results Patients of both two groups were followed for one year. The rate of patients receiving treatment at outpatient clinic and re-hospitalization was 67. 31% and 19. 23% in group A,respectively. The rate of patients receiving treatment at outpatient clinic and re-hospitalization was 77. 27% and 31. 82% in group A,respectively. The overall length（ day） of acute attack of COPD in group A was shorter than that in group B（ 15. 01 ± 4. 81 vs. 33. 01 ± 11. 51,P〈0. 05）. There were 9 patients（17. 31%） in group A and 13 patients（29. 55%） in group B receiving systemic treatment with glucocorticoid. There were 34 patients（65. 38%） in group A and 40 patients（90. 91%） in group B receiving antibiotic treatment,with a significant difference（ P〈0. 05）. Conclusion The home atomization inhalation is an safe and effective treatment for acute attack of COPD.