俯卧位机械通气治疗肺外源性ARDS和肺内源性ARDS的效果比较

目的探讨俯卧位机械通气在肺外源性ARDS和肺内源性ARDS患者中的治疗效果差异。方法选取2014年3月至2015年11月我院收治120例ARDS患者为研究对象,根据患者发病不同原因分为A组(肺内源性ARDS患者,60例)和B组(肺外源性ARDS患者,60例),比较两组患者俯卧位机械通气4 h后的血氧分压(PaO_2)、二氧化碳分压(PaCO_2)、氧合指数(PaO_2/FiO_2)、心率(HR)、平均动脉压及心指数。结果 B组患者的PaO_2、PaO_2/FiO_2均显著高于A组,PaCO_2显著低于A组(P<0.05)。两组患者HR、平均动脉压及心指数比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论俯卧位机械通气在肺外源性ARDS的治疗效果较肺内源性ARDS更为显著,但对血流动力学无影响。     

氧合指数与急性呼吸衰竭行有创通气治疗患者预后的关系

目的探讨氧合指数与急性呼吸衰竭行有创通气治疗患者预后的关系。方法选取2008年1月至2012年10月山东省即墨市人民医院行有创通气治疗急性呼吸衰竭患者75例,其中死亡28例,设为死亡组,存活47例,设为存活组;比较两组患者行有创通气治疗前急性生理与慢性健康状况(APACHE)Ⅲ评分、多器官功能障碍综合征(MODS)评分,治疗1、3、7 d后氧合指数(Pa O2/Fi O2)、动脉血二氧化碳分压(Pa CO2)及p H值等血气分析指标水平。结果存活组和死亡组患者行有创通气治疗前急性生理学与慢性健康状况评分Ⅲ(APACHEⅢ)评分和多器官功能障碍综合征(MODS)评分组间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);存活组和死亡组患者治疗1 d后Pa O2/Fi O2、Pa CO2及p H水平组间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);两组患者治疗3、7 d后Pa CO2和p H水平组间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);但死亡组患者治疗3、7 d后Pa O2/Fi O2水平明显低于存活组(P<0.05);存活组和死亡组在治疗后不同时间(1、3、7 d)的Pa O2/Fi O2和Pa CO2比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论氧合指数与急性呼吸衰竭行有创通气治疗患者预后关系密切,可作为临床评价重要参考指标之一。     

普外科住院患者连续护理的实践与效果探究

目的 探讨并统计连续护理对普外科住院患者的护理效果.方法 该研究通过随机选取了2013年1月—2014年6月该院普外科患者入院治疗的不同患者100例,按照随机抽样分组原理,将100例患者分成观察组与对照组两组(各50例),对观察组选择优秀护理骨干开展专职连续护理实践,并对专职护理前后效果通过统计分析与对照组对比,观察连续护理对普外科住院患者的护理效果,从而对实践成果进行评估.结果 在进行连续性护理后,观察组患者对相关疾病知识、 治疗知识及康复知识的测评中,非常熟悉的比例占12.0%、 比较熟悉的占26.0%、 熟悉的占46.0%,而对照组患者非常熟悉的占6%、比较熟悉的占14%、熟悉的占24%,因此可以看出观察组患者疾病认知度要高于对照组.观察组患者对护士的满意度为(99.0%),要明显高于对照组(80.0%)的比例.结论 连续护理提高了普外科住院患者对疾病治疗及康复等相关知识的认识程度,并提高了住院患者对护理人员的满意度,因此达到更好护理效果的目的.     

PiCCO容量指标在感染性休克液体复苏中的临床应用

脉搏指示连续心输出量监测(Pi CCO)技术是一项经肺温度热稀释和动脉脉搏轮廓分析联合应用的新技术,近年来逐渐广泛应用于重症患者,尤其是感染性休克患者的血流动力学监测。与传统容量监测指标中心静脉压相比,其容量性指标胸腔内血容积指数、血管外肺水指数能更准确、可靠地反映患者的容量状态,从而实施精细、优化的液体管理,在改善感染性休克患者氧合、缩短机械通气时间、降低病死率方面展现出优势。     

沙美特罗氟替卡松对COPD患者的治疗效果及安全性分析

目的探讨沙美特罗氟替卡松在慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者中的治疗效果及安全性。方法选取2014年4月至2015年7月我院收治的COPD患者92例,随机分为两组。对照组行常规治疗,研究组在对照组基础上给予沙美特罗氟替卡松治疗。两组患者均连续治疗6个月。比较两组的疗效及不良反应发生率。结果研究组的总有效率为97.83%,显著高于对照组的82.61%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。研究组的关节痛发生率为23.91%,显著高于对照组的2.17%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);两组患者皮疹、水肿、胃肠不适发生率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论沙美特罗氟替卡松治疗COPD患者可提高疗效,但长期使用可引起患者骨密度下降,发生关节疼痛,临床中应针对性进行预防。     

经鼻高流量氧气湿化治疗老年慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性加重合并呼吸衰竭的可行性研究

ObjectiveTo investigate the feasibility of transnasal heated humidified high flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (HFNC) in the treatment of acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) with respiratory failure in elderly patients. MethodsA total of 176 elderly patients with AECOPD complicated with respiratory failure who were hospitalized at Peking University Shougang Hospital from December 2016 to January 2022 were enrolled, including 82 patients in an HFNC group and 94 patients in an NPPV group. After treatment, pulse oxygen saturation (SPO₂), arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO₂), oxygenation index (OI), respiratory rate (RR), heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), comfort score, discharge rate, rate of endotracheal intubation, rate of transfer to intensive care unit (ICU), and mortality were compared between the two groups. The independent sample t-test was used for comparison between the two groups. Statistical data are expressed in percentage or number of cases and the χ² test was used for their comparisons. ResultsThe SPO₂ values at 30 min, 1 h, and 6 h were significantly higher in the HFNC group than in the NPPV group (t=-2.049,-2.618, and -3.314, P=0.043, 0.010, and 0.001, respectively). SPO₂ before discharge was significantly lower than that of the NPPV group (t=2.162, P=0.033), but OI at each time point and before discharge had no statistical significance (P＞0.05). MAP at 6 h was significantly higher in the HFNC group than in the NPPV group (t=-2.209, P=0.029), but within the normal range. HRs at 2 h and 3 h in the HFNC group were significantly higher than those of the NPPV group (t=-2.199 and -2.336, P=0.030 and 0.021, respectively). There were no significant differences in RR, HR, or MAP between the two groups at other time points and before discharge (P＞0.05). There was no significant difference in PaCO2 between the two groups (P＞0.05). Comfort score in the HFNC group was significantly higher than that of the NPPV group (t=-46.807, P＜0.001). There were no significant differences in discharge rate, ICU transfer rate, endotracheal intubation rate, and mortality between the two groups (P＞0.05). ConclusionHFNC is as effective as NPPV in treating elderly patients with AECOPD complicated with type Ⅰ or mild type Ⅱ respiratory failure, and HFNC is more comfortable than NPPV.