目的:比较氧气驱动雾化吸入与空气压缩泵雾化吸入治疗儿童哮喘急性发作期的疗效。方法:选取42例哮喘急性发作期儿童作为研究对象,将其随机分为对照组和观察组,对照组采用空气压缩泵雾化吸入治疗,观察组采用氧气驱动雾化吸入治疗。一周...目的:比较氧气驱动雾化吸入与空气压缩泵雾化吸入治疗儿童哮喘急性发作期的疗效。方法:选取42例哮喘急性发作期儿童作为研究对象,将其随机分为对照组和观察组,对照组采用空气压缩泵雾化吸入治疗,观察组采用氧气驱动雾化吸入治疗。一周后比较2组患儿的总有效率、合并低氧血症者治疗后的总有效率与不合并低氧血症者的总有效率的差异、各项临床症状及体征(呼吸困难、喘息、咳嗽、哮鸣音)消失的时间及治疗前后最大呼气流速(PEF)的变化。结果:治疗一周后,观察组的总有效率为95.2%,明显高于对照组的61.9%,差异显著(P P P > 0.05;观察组各项临床症状及体征(呼吸困难、喘息、咳嗽、哮鸣音)消失的时间明显短于对照组(P P Objective: To compare the efficacy of oxygen driven nebulization inhalation and air compression pump nebulization inhalation in the treatment of acute asthma attacks in children. Method: 42 children with acute asthma attacks were selected as the research subjects and randomly divided into a control group and an observation group. The control group was treated with air compression pump nebulization inhalation, while the observation group was treated with oxygen driven nebulization inhalation. Compare the total effective rate of two groups of children one week later, the difference in total effective rate between patients with hypoxemia and those without hypoxemia after treatment, the time for various clinical symptoms and signs (dyspnea, wheezing, cough, wheezing) to disappear, and the changes in maximum expiratory flow rate (PEF) before and after treatment. Result: After one week of treatment, the total effective rate of the observation group was 95.2%, significantly higher than the control group’s 61.9%, with a significant difference (P P P > 0.05. The disappearance time of various clinical symptoms and signs (dyspnea, wheezing, cough, wheezing) in the observation group was significantly shorter than that in the control group (P P < 0.05). Conclusion: Two different nebulization inhalation methods have achieved good therapeutic effects in treating acute asthma attacks in children, but the oxygen driven nebulization inhalation method is more effective, with more significant improvement in the patient’s condition and better prognosis.展开更多
文摘目的:比较氧气驱动雾化吸入与空气压缩泵雾化吸入治疗儿童哮喘急性发作期的疗效。方法:选取42例哮喘急性发作期儿童作为研究对象,将其随机分为对照组和观察组,对照组采用空气压缩泵雾化吸入治疗,观察组采用氧气驱动雾化吸入治疗。一周后比较2组患儿的总有效率、合并低氧血症者治疗后的总有效率与不合并低氧血症者的总有效率的差异、各项临床症状及体征(呼吸困难、喘息、咳嗽、哮鸣音)消失的时间及治疗前后最大呼气流速(PEF)的变化。结果:治疗一周后,观察组的总有效率为95.2%,明显高于对照组的61.9%,差异显著(P P P > 0.05;观察组各项临床症状及体征(呼吸困难、喘息、咳嗽、哮鸣音)消失的时间明显短于对照组(P P Objective: To compare the efficacy of oxygen driven nebulization inhalation and air compression pump nebulization inhalation in the treatment of acute asthma attacks in children. Method: 42 children with acute asthma attacks were selected as the research subjects and randomly divided into a control group and an observation group. The control group was treated with air compression pump nebulization inhalation, while the observation group was treated with oxygen driven nebulization inhalation. Compare the total effective rate of two groups of children one week later, the difference in total effective rate between patients with hypoxemia and those without hypoxemia after treatment, the time for various clinical symptoms and signs (dyspnea, wheezing, cough, wheezing) to disappear, and the changes in maximum expiratory flow rate (PEF) before and after treatment. Result: After one week of treatment, the total effective rate of the observation group was 95.2%, significantly higher than the control group’s 61.9%, with a significant difference (P P P > 0.05. The disappearance time of various clinical symptoms and signs (dyspnea, wheezing, cough, wheezing) in the observation group was significantly shorter than that in the control group (P P < 0.05). Conclusion: Two different nebulization inhalation methods have achieved good therapeutic effects in treating acute asthma attacks in children, but the oxygen driven nebulization inhalation method is more effective, with more significant improvement in the patient’s condition and better prognosis.
