摘要
目的探讨常规湿化与未湿化中低流量(<4L/min)鼻导管吸氧对患者呼吸道症状的影响是否有明显差异。方法按患者入住时间分为,①持续中低流量鼻导管吸氧>12h的患者分为常规湿化吸氧组(湿化组)和未经湿化吸氧组(未湿化组);②持续中低流量鼻导管吸氧时间>24h的患者,自身常规湿化吸氧和未经湿化吸氧,观察比较患者的呼吸道反应。结果鼻咽喉部干燥感为本研究中出现的唯一症状。方法1观察540例中湿化组235例,主诉鼻咽喉部干燥者21例,干燥组305例,主诉鼻咽喉部干燥者36例,2组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);方法2观察226例,其中在湿化吸氧过程中主诉鼻咽喉部干燥者9例,改为未湿化吸氧后症状无明显加重;在未经湿化吸氧过程中主诉鼻咽喉部干燥者11例,改为湿化吸氧后症状无明显减轻,两种不同的吸氧方式对患者呼吸道影响差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论中低流量鼻导管吸氧无需常规湿化。
Objective To explore the effect of humidification of oxygen delivered by nasal cannula on the respiratory symp- toms. Method A total of 540 patients receiving low-to-mid flow oxygen therapy （〈4L/min） by nasal cannula for more than 12 hours were assigned to receive humidified （n=235） or dry （n=305）oxygen. While 226 patients receiving a low-to-mid flow oxygen therapy for more than 24 hours received humidified or dry oxygen respectively. The patients＇ respiratory symptoms were observed and recorded. Results Dryness over naso-pharyngeal region was the only symptom reported by patients in this study. There was no significant difference on the rate of dryness over naso-pharyngeal region between patients receiving humidified oxygen and patients receiving dry oxygen（P〉0.05） either in the same patients when receiving dry and humidified oxygen （P〉 0.05）. Conclusion Routine humidification is not necessary in low-to-mid flow oxygen therapy by nasal cannula.
出处
《中华护理杂志》
CSCD
北大核心
2010年第1期31-32,共2页
Chinese Journal of Nursing
基金
2007年度海南省自然科学基金资助项目(编号:807089)
关键词
湿化
氧吸入疗法
Humidification
Oxygen Inhalation Therapy
