摘要
目的比较矽肺灌洗患者辅用支气管镜时不同干预方法临床效果。方法选择在我院进行矽肺灌洗辅用支气管镜的患者60例,分成A、B、C 3组,A组采用传统喉头喷雾+气管滴注干预法;B组采用经鼻滴入干预法;C组采用雾化吸入干预法。检查结束后对3组患者的舒适度、起效时间、干预效果、麻药使用计量和不良反应情况进行评价。结果通过对3种不同干预方法的比较,发现经鼻滴入法干预效果好、干预耗时短、麻药使用量少,但舒适度低、不良反应率高;雾化吸入法患者的舒适度高、不良反应率低;喉头喷雾+气管滴注法则表现一般。结论要根据患者自身情况选择适合患者的干预方法,但对大多数患者来说,经鼻滴入法应作为首选干预方法。
Objective To compare the clinical effects of different intervention methods on patients undergoing silicosis lavage assisted by bronchoscopy. Methods 60 patients undergoing silicosis lavage assisted by bronchoscopy in our hospital were selected and divided into group A,B and C. Group A was treated with traditional laryngeal spray ＋ trachea dripping,group B was treated with nasal drip,and group C was treated with atomization inhalation intervention. At the end of the examination,the comfort level,onset time,intervention effect,anesthetic usage and adverse reactions of the three groups were evaluated. Results Through clinical comparison of the three different intervention methods,it was found out that the effect of nasal drip intervention was good,the intervention time was short,the use of anesthetics was less,but the comfort level was low,the occurrence rate of adverse reactions was high; the comfort level of the patients with atomization inhalation was high,the occurrence rate of adverse reactions was low,and the effect of laryngeal spray ＋ trachea dripping was general. Conclusion It is necessary to select suitable interventions for patients based on their own physical conditions,but for most patients,nasal drip should be the first choice.
作者
迟欣欣
汪明
Chi Xinxin;Wang Ming(Liaoning Vocational College of Medicine,Shenyang 110101 China)
出处
《锦州医科大学学报》
CAS
2018年第4期102-104,共3页
Journal of Jinzhou Medical University
