持续气道湿化与间断雾化吸入对重型颅脑损伤气管切开患者气道湿化效果观察

目的　探讨持续气道湿化与间断雾化吸入对重型颅脑损伤气管切开患者气道湿化的效果。方法　采用前瞻性研究法，选取南阳市第二人民医院2020年1月至2021年12月期间收治的重型颅脑损伤行气管切开患者72例，按随机数字表法分为对照组和观察组，各36例。对照组中男23例，女13例，年龄24～67（44.32±4.72）岁，采取间断雾化吸入方法。观察组中男24例，女12例，年龄20～65（43.96±5.25）岁，采取持续气道湿化方法。比较两组患者痰液湿化效果、患者舒适度、睡眠质量及并发症发生率。采用t检验、χ²检验及秩和检验进行分析。结果　两组一般资料比较，差异均无统计学意义（均P>0.05）。观察组痰液湿化效果优于对照组，差异有统计学意义（Z=2.567，P=0.010）。干预前，两组患者的Koicaba舒适状况量表（GCQ）、匹兹堡睡眠质量指数量表（PSQI）评分比较，差异均无统计学意义（均P>0.05）；干预后，观察组GCQ评分为（78.19±5.48）分，高于对照组的（70.35±6.63）分，PSQI评分为（7.93±1.25）分，低于对照组的（11.27±2.54）分，差异均有统计学意义（t=5.469、7.079，均P<0.05）。观察组并发症发生率为11.11%（4/36），低于对照组的33.33%（12/36），差异有统计学意义（χ²=5.143，P<0.05）。结论　持续气道湿化在重型颅脑损伤气管切开患者中的应用效果优于间断雾化吸入，利于增强湿化效果，提高患者舒适度和睡眠质量，降低并发症发生率。

Effect of continuous airway humidification and intermittent atomizationinhalation on airway humidification in patients with severe craniocerebralinjury undergoing tracheotomy

Objective　To investigate the effect of continuous airway humidification andintermittent atomization inhalation on airway humidification in patients withsevere craniocerebral injury undergoing tracheotomy. Methods　A prospective study was conducted. Seventy-two patients with severecraniocerebral injury who underwent tracheotomy in Nanyang Second People'sHospital from January 2020 to December 2021 were selected, and were dividedinto a control group and an observation group by the random number tablemethod, with 36 cases in each group. The control group had 23 males and 13females who were 24-67 (44.32±4.72) years old, and they were treated by theintermittent atomization inhalation method. The observation group had 24 malesand 12 females who were 20-65 (43.96±5.25) years old, and they were treated bythe continuous airway humidification method. The sputum humidification effects,patient comfort, sleep quality, and incidences of complications were comparedbetween the two groups. t test, χ² test, and rank-sum testwere used for the analysis. Results　There were nostatistical differences in the general data between the two groups (all P > 0.05). The effect of sputumhumidification in the observation group was better than that in the controlgroup, with a statistical difference (Z=2.567, P=0.010). Before the intervention,there were no statistical differences between the two groups in the scores ofKoicaba Comfort Scale (GCQ) and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) (both P>0.05). After the intervention, thescores of GCQ and PSQI were (78.19±5.48) and (7.93±1.25) in the observationgroup, and were (70.35±6.63) and (11.27±2.54) in the control group, withstatistical differences (t=5.469 and 7.079,both P<0.05). The incidence ofcomplications in the observation group was lower than that in the control group[11.11% (4/36) vs. 33.33% (12/36)], with a statistical difference (χ²=5.143, P<0.05). Conclusions　The application effect of continuous airway humidification in patientswith severe craniocerebral injury undergoing tracheotomy is better than that ofintermittent atomization inhalation; it is conducive to enhance thehumidification effect, improve the patients’ comfort and sleep quality, and reducethe incidence of complications.