不同雾化方式对老年肺炎患者诱导排痰的效果评估  

作　　者：叶小琴[1] 吴海燕[2] 罗麟洁[1] 李卫宁[1] 宋敏 

机构地区：[1]四川省宜宾市第一人民医院,644000 [2]四川省人民医院,610072 [3]四川省宜宾市珙县人民医院,644000

出　　处：《浙江临床医学》2017年第7期1257-1259,共3页Zhejiang Clinical Medical Journal

基　　金：四川省宜宾市科学技术局科技项目（2013YZY004）

摘　　要：目的评估不同雾化方式对老年肺炎患者诱导排痰的效果。方法选择老年肺炎患者108例，随机分为3组，分别采用氧气雾化、压力雾化、超声雾化三种方式，比较其疗效。结果三组方式时心率、呼吸频率、血氧饱和度的影响差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）；氧气雾化组较压力雾化、超声雾化组FEV1，预计值下降〉15％的例数少（P〈0．05）；氧气雾化、压力雾化组较超声雾化组排痰效果好（P〈0．05）；氧气雾化不良反应少（P〈0．05）。结论三种雾化比较，使用氧气雾化对老年肺炎患者诱导排痰效果好、安全性高，患者舒适度更佳，应优先选择。Objective To evaluated the efficacy of induced sputum in elderly patients with pneumonia by different atomization. Methods 108 cases of elderly patients with pneumonia were selected as the study object, who were randomized into three groups. The efficacy of oxygen atomization, pressure atomization and ultrasonic atomization was compared. Results There was no significant difference in heart rate, respiratory rate and oxygen saturation among the three groups （ P〉0.05 ） . The number of FEV1 / predicted % decrease〉15% in oxygen atomization group less than in pressure atomization group and ultrasonic atomization group （ P〈0.05 ） . The amount of expectoration in oxygen atomization group and pressure atomization group was better than that in ultrasonic atomization group （ P〈0.05 ） . Adverse reactions were less in the oxygen atomization group （ P〈0.05 ） . Conclusion Compared among the three kinds of atomization, induced sputum in elderly patients with pneumonia by oxygen atomization have a better effect, safety and comfort, which should be preferred.

关 键 词：氧气雾化 压力雾化 超声雾化 诱导排痰 老年肺炎 

分 类 号：R563.1[医药卫生—呼吸系统]