两种经口腔气管插管急救方法的效果比较

目的]探讨改良法经口腔气管插管进行床旁急救的效果.方法]将146例床旁急救经口腔行气管插管术的病人,随机分为改良组76例和常规组70例.改良法从口腔左角直接置入喉镜插管,常规法从口腔右角置入喉镜插管.观察两种方法暴露会厌或声门的程度、插管成功率、人均插管所需时间、牙齿和咽部损伤情况.结果]两种方法在暴露会厌或声门的程度、插管成功率、人均插管所需时间、牙齿和咽部损伤方面差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05或P＜0.01).结论]改良法气管插管术,暴露喉部路径短、视野宽、效果好,可明显提高一次插管成功率,缩短抢救时间.

A comparison of two different ways of tracheal intubation via oral cavity for emergency cases

Objective: Probe into the effect of improved via oral tracheal intubation for bedside emergency treatment of patients. Method: A total of 146 cases accepted bedside emergency treatment with tracheal intubation via oral cavity were divided into test (76 cases) and control group (70 cases). Patients of test group had accepted tracheal intubation via improved method that was to place the cannula under laryngoscope from left side of oral cavity. While cases of control group underwent tracheal intubation by traditional way that was to do that from right side of oral cavity. Result: There were significant differences in terms of the exposure of epiglottis and glottis, the intubation achievement ratio, average intubation time and the trauma of JP3]teeth and pharyngeal portion between the two groups (P<0.05 or P<0.01).JP]Conclusion: The improved way of tracheal intubation can enhance the one-time intubation achievement ratio, shorten rescuing time obviously, with the advantage of short length of laryngopharyngeal recess exposure, wide-field and better effect.