摘要
目的探讨在慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)合并Ⅱ型呼吸衰竭的治疗中,采用鼻导管高流量加湿给氧方式所取得的临床成效。方法抽取自2021年1月至2023年12月期间在南阳市中心医院接受治疗的84名慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性加重期(AECOPD)伴随Ⅱ型呼吸衰竭的患者作为实验样本。通过随机数字表法将这些患者平均分为对照组和观察组,每组各含42名患者。对照组患者接受无创正压通气疗法,而观察组患者则采用鼻导管高流量加湿给氧疗法。两组患者在治疗前后的动脉血氧分压(PaO_(2))、动脉血二氧化碳分压(PaCO_(2))、pH值、平均动脉压(MAP)、心率、呼吸频率、C反应蛋白、白细胞介素-6(IL-6)、肿瘤坏死因子-α(TNF-α)、生活质量[圣乔治呼吸问卷(SGRQ)]及舒适度[Kolcaba的舒适状况量表(GCQ)]指标进行对比分析。另外记录两组患者的住院时间以及治疗过程中出现的不良反应情况。结果治疗前,两组患者PaO_(2)、PaCO_(2)、pH值、MAP、心率、呼吸频率数据比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。治疗后,两组患者PaO_(2)、pH值均升高,PaCO_(2)、MAP、心率、呼吸频率均降低,且观察组的心率、呼吸频率明显低于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。治疗后,两组PaO_(2)、PaCO_(2)、pH值、MAP数据比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。治疗前,两组C反应蛋白、白细胞介素-6、肿瘤坏死因子-α水平比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。治疗后,两组患者C反应蛋白、白细胞介素-6、肿瘤坏死因子-α水平均显著降低,且观察组低于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。治疗前,两组SGRQ评分、GCQ评分比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。治疗后,两组SGRQ评分均降低,GCQ评分均升高,且观察组SGRQ评分低于对照组,GCQ评分高于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。观察组的住院天数及不良反应发生率均低于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论鼻导
Objective To explore the clinical efficacy of nasal high-flow humidified oxygen therapy in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease(COPD)complicated by type II respiratory failure.Methods A total of 84 patients diagnosed with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease(AECOPD)and type II respiratory failure,treated at Nanyang Central Hospital from January 2021 to December 2023,were selected as study subjects.Patients were randomly divided into two groups,with 42 patients in each group.The control group received non-invasive positive pressure ventilation,while the observation group received nasal high-flow humidified oxygen therapy.The two groups were compared before and after treatment regarding arterial blood oxygen partial pressure(PaO_(2)),arterial carbon dioxide partial pressure(PaCO_(2)),pH value,mean arterial pressure(MAP),heart rate,respiratory rate,C-reactive protein,interleukin-6(IL-6),tumor necrosis factor-alpha(TNF-α),quality of life[St.George's Respiratory Questionnaire(SGRQ)],and comfort level[Kolcaba Comfort Questionnaire(GCQ)].The length of hospital stay and the occurrence of adverse reactions were also recorded for both groups.Results Before treatment,there were no statistically significant differences in PaO_(2),PaCO_(2),pH value,MAP,heart rate,and respiratory rate between the two groups(P>0.05).After treatment,both groups showed increased PaO_(2)and pH values,and decreased PaCO_(2),MAP,heart rate,and respiratory rate,with the observation group exhibiting significantly lower heart rate and respiratory rate compared to the control group(P<0.05).However,there were no significant differences in PaO_(2),PaCO_(2),pH value,and MAP between the two groups post-treatment(P>0.05).Prior to treatment,C-reactive protein,IL-6,and TNF-αlevels showed no significant differences between the groups(P>0.05).After treatment,both groups had significantly lower levels of C-reactive protein,IL-6,and TNF-α,with the observation group being lower than the control group the difference was st
作者
任园园
路青竹
于春艳
REN Yuanyuan;LU Qingzhu;YU Chunyan(Department of Respiratory Medicine,Nanyang Central Hospital,Nanyang Henan 473000,China)
出处
《临床研究》
2024年第12期77-81,共5页
Clinical Research
关键词
经鼻高流量湿化氧疗
慢性阻塞性肺疾病
呼吸衰竭
无创正压通气
临床症状
nasal high-flow humidified oxygen therapy
chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
respiratory failure
non-invasive positive pressure ventilation
clinical symptoms
