被动与主动湿化器对人工气道湿化效果的Meta分析  

Compare of passive and active humidification on artificial airway： a Meta-analysis

作　　者：李颖[1] 秦运俭[1] 

机构地区：[1]湖南省常德市第一人民医院重症医学科,415000

出　　处：《中华现代护理杂志》2015年第11期1283-1286,共4页Chinese Journal of Modern Nursing

摘　　要：目的比较被动湿化器和主动湿化器用于人工气道的湿化效果。方法计算机检索和手工检索中国知网、万方医学、维普VIP数据库，收集研究分别以被动及主动湿化器作为人工气道湿化装置，将气道湿化效果、堵管率、肺部感染率等作为结局指标的随机对照试验（RCTs），采用Cochrane协作网RevMen5．2软件进行统计分析。结果共纳入国内符合本研究标准的11个RCTs，包括1531例患者。被动与主动湿化器用于人工气道时湿化过度，湿化满意，湿化不足效果的95％可信区间分别为0．47（0．3～0．73。P=0．0009），1．32（1．01～1．73，P=0．04）与0．88（0．43～1．78，P=0．71）；堵管率的95％可信区间0．88（0．43～1．78，P=0．71）；肺部感染发生率的95％可信区间0．57（0．50～0．90，P=0．008）。结论基于中国目前的RCTs研究发现，将被动湿化器作为人工气道的湿化装置能明显提高气道湿化满意度，防止湿化过度，减少肺部感染的发生。但此分析受限于儿科、新生儿患者、呼吸储备功能差及堵管高发人群，更加完善的RCT有必要去验证HME使用的广泛性。Objective To compare the effect of passive humidification and active humidification on artificial airway. Methods We collected all related RCTs from CNKI, Wangfang database, VIP database for the information of passive and active humidification of artificial airways, and its effects, rate of tube plugging, rate of pulmonary infection as outcome indicator by computer. Results We included 11 RCTs involved 1531 participants.The 95% CI were 0.47 （0.3-0.73, P = 0. 000 9 ）, 1.32 （ 1.01-1.73, P = 0. 04） and 0.88 （0.43--1.78, P =0. 71 ） for passive and active humidification, satisfaction of humidification, inadequate humidification, and rate of tube plugging 0.88 （ 0. 43-1. 78 , P = 0, 71 ）, rate of pulmonary infection 0.57 （0.50-0.90,P = 0. 008）. Conclusions Based on present RCTs in China, there is a significant increase in the humidifier＇s performances in patients humidified with passive humidification during the upper airway, but this finding is limited by pediatric, neonatal and high-risk tube plugging groups. Further RCTs are necessary to examine the wider applicability of heat and moisture exchangers and their extended use.

关 键 词：人工鼻 加热湿化器 湿化效果 META分析 

分 类 号：R472[医药卫生—护理学]