CAJ | 학술논문

目的：：探讨湿化液刺激排痰法配合常规呼吸机气道湿化法在机械通气气道湿化患者中的应用效果。方法：将60例机械通气患者随机等分为试验组和对照组，对照组按照常规气道湿化法，试验组采用常规气道湿化法+湿化液刺激排痰法，比较两组患者吸痰效果。结果：试验组患者痰液黏稠程度轻于对照组(P <0.05)，气道黏膜损伤出血发生率低于对照组(P <0.05)，起效时间快于对照组(P <0.05)，并发症中痰阻、窒息发生率两组差异无统计学意义(P >0.05)。结论：湿化液刺激排痰法配合常规气道湿化法，在改善机械通气患者气道湿化效果方面具有良好的辅助疗效。
목적：：탐토습화액자격배담법배합상규호흡궤기도습화법재궤계통기기도습화환자중적응용효과。방법：장60례궤계통기환자수궤등분위시험조화대조조，대조조안조상규기도습화법，시험조채용상규기도습화법+습화액자격배담법，비교량조환자흡담효과。결과：시험조환자담액점주정도경우대조조(P <0.05)，기도점막손상출혈발생솔저우대조조(P <0.05)，기효시간쾌우대조조(P <0.05)，병발증중담조、질식발생솔량조차이무통계학의의(P >0.05)。결론：습화액자격배담법배합상규기도습화법，재개선궤계통기환자기도습화효과방면구유량호적보조료효。
Objective:To evaluate the efficacy of humidificating fluid assistance to sputamentum discharges in patients of conventional mechanical ventilation with humidifier. Methods:60 cases of mechanical ventilation were randomly divided into two groups. The efficacy of sputamentum discharges was evaluated between experimental group (conventional airway humidification plus humidificating fluid assistance) and control group (conventional airway humidification without humidificating fluid assistance). Results:There were significant differences of sputamentum viscidity, stagnation of sputamentum,incidence of airway mucosa injuries and onset time (P < 0. 05). There was no significant difference of suffocation incidence between two groups. Conclusion:Humidificating flu-id is effective assistance to conventional airway humidification in patients with mechanical ventilation.