不同雾化吸入方式吸入沐舒坦治疗慢性支气管炎急性发作期患者的疗效观察

目的探讨氧驱动、空气压缩泵驱动入以及超声3种不同雾化吸入方式吸入沐舒坦对慢性支气管炎急性发作期的治疗效果。方法 2008年在东莞市中医院住院治疗的慢性支气管炎急性发展期患者120例,随机分为3组,均在应用综合治疗(抗病毒、抗感染、使用皮质激素、解痉平喘)的基础上,加用沐舒坦进行雾化吸入。然后观察3组的治疗效果。结果氧驱动雾化吸入组与空气压缩泵雾化吸入组总有效率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。氧驱动雾化吸入组与超声雾化吸入组总有效率间差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。空气压缩泵雾化吸入组与超声雾化吸入组总有效率之间差异比较有统计学意义(P<0.05)。并且超声雾化吸入组在雾化过程中出现2例不良反应,而被迫停止继续雾化。结论氧驱动雾化吸入方式慢性支气管炎急性发作期效果最好,空气压缩泵驱动雾化吸入方式治疗效果次之,超声雾化吸入方式不适宜慢性支气管炎急性发作期治疗。

The Efficacy about Nebulized Inhalation of Different Ways of Ambroxol Treatment of Patients with Acute Exacerbation of Chronic Bronchitis

Objective To discuss the effect about inhalation of oxygen-driven, air compressor pump and ultrasonic atomizing inhalation of nebulized 3 different ways inhalation inhalation of ambroxol on acute exacerbation of chronic bronchitis treatment. Methods Select 2008 in Dongguan hospital of traditional Chinese medicine with acute development of chronic bronchitis 120 patients were randomly divided into 3 groups, both in the combined treatment（antibiotics, anti-virus, corticosteroids, antispasmodic asthma treatment）basis, plus mucosolvan inhalation, Then observe the three treatment groups. Results Inhalation of oxygen-driven air compressor pump group and the inhalation group was no significant difference in efficiency（P〉 0.05）.Oxygen group and the ultrasonic atomizing inhalation aerosol inhalation group was statistically significant difference between the efficiency（P〈 0.05）.Inhalation of air compression pump group and the ultrasonic aerosol inhalation group was statistically significant difference between the efficiency（P 〈 0.05）. And ultrasonic atomizing inhalation group process of 2 cases of adverse reactions, but was forced to stop to spray. Conclusion Inhalation of oxygen-driven mode of chronic bronchitis with acute exacerbation of the best, air compressor pump driven inhalation treatment method followed by ultrasonic nebulized form appropriate treatment of acute exacerbation of chronic bronchitis.