两种声门下吸引法对气道黏膜损伤的比较研究  

Comparative study on airway mucosa injury by two kinds of suction under glottis

作　　者：周丹丹[1] 冯婕[1] 白丹[1] 

机构地区：[1]杭州市第三人民医院,浙江杭州310009

出　　处：《护理与康复》2009年第12期993-994,共2页Journal of Nursing and Rehabilitation

摘　　要：目的比较两种声门下吸引法对气道黏膜损伤的影响。方法将监护病房气管插管行机械通气的100例患者按入科顺序分观察组和对照组各50例。观察组采用间歇声门下吸引,对照组采用持续声门下吸引,比较两组每天声门下分泌物的吸引量及声门下分泌物隐血试验阳性率。结果两组声门下分泌物吸引量差异比较无统计学意义;观察组声门下分泌物隐血试验阳性率显著低于对照组,差异比较有统计学意义。结论两种声门下吸引法的效果相似,但持续声门下吸引存在声门下与气囊上方呼吸道黏膜损伤出血的风险。Objective To compare the effect of airway mucosa injury by two kinds of suction under glottis. Method Di vide 100 patients undergoing mechanical ventilation via tracheal intubation in intensive care unit into observation group （n= 50） and control group （n=50） according to the order of entering the department. Patients in observation group receive interval suction under glottis and patients in control group receive continuous suction under glottis. Compare the suction volume and positive rate of occult blood test of secretion under glottis every day. Result There is no significant difference on suction volume of secretion under glottis between the two groups. The positive rate of occult blood test in observation group is obviously lower than the rate in control group. The difference is significant. Conclusion Effects of two kinds of suction under glottis are similar. But continuous suction under glottis has the risk of injury and hemorrhage in respiratory mucosa.

关 键 词：机械通气 声门下吸引 间歇吸引 持续吸引 气道黏膜损伤 

分 类 号：R473.5[医药卫生—护理学]