慢性阻塞性肺疾病机械通气患者营养风险与营养治疗策略的多中心研究  

A multicenter study on nutritional risk and nutritional therapy strategy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease undergoing mechanical ventilation

作　　者：朱李俊 唐卫东 陈琪 邵雪波 沈晓圆[2] 郑坚[3] 鲁海燕[4] 潘华飞 陈学清 陈君 汤蓓[8] 马建忠 徐军 Zhu Lijun;Tang Weidong;Chen Qi;Shao Xuebo;ShenXiaoyuan;Zheng Jian;Lu Hanyan;Pan Huafei;Chen Xueqing;Chen Qun;Tang Bei;Ma Jianzhong;Xu Jun(Department of Intensive Care Unit,First People's Hospital of Fuyang District,Hangzhou 311400,Zhejiang,China;Department ofIntensive Care Unit,Second,People's Hospital of Fuyang District,Hangzhou 311400,Zhejiang,China;Department of Intensive Care Unit,First People's Hospital of Xiaoshan District,Hangzhou 311200,Zhejiang,China;Department of Intensive Care Unit,First People's Hospital of Yuhang District,Hangzhou 311100,Zhejiang,China;Department of Intensive Care Unit,Second People's Hospital of Yuhang District,Hangzhou 311100,Zhejiang,China;Department of Intensive Care Unit,Third People's Hospital of Yuhang District,Hangzhou 311100,Zhejiang,China;Department of Intensive Care Unit,People's Hospital of Linan District,Hangzhou 311300,Zhejiang,China;Departmentof Intensive Care Unit,Linan Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine,Hangzhou 311300,Zhejiang,China;Department of Intensive Care Unit,First People's Hospital of Jiande District,Hangzhou 311600,Zhejiang,China;Department ofIntensive Care Unit,Second People's Hospital of Tonglu District,Hangzhou 311500,Zhejiang,China)

机构地区：[1]杭州市富阳区第一人民医院重症医学科,浙江杭州311400 [10]杭州市富阳区第二人民医院,浙江杭州311400 [2]杭州市萧山区第一人民医院,浙江杭州311200 [3]杭州市余杭区第一人民医院,浙江杭州3111OO [4]杭州市余杭区第二人民医院,浙江杭州3111OO [5]杭州市余杭区第三人民医院,浙江杭州311100 [6]杭州市临安区人民医院,浙江杭州3113OO [7]杭州市临安区中医院,浙江杭州311300 [8]杭州市建德市第一人民医院,浙江杭州311600 [9]杭州市桐庐县第二人民医院,浙江杭州311500

出　　处：《中国中西医结合急救杂志》2019年第2期152-157,共6页Chinese Journal of Integrated Traditional and Western Medicine in Intensive and Critical Care

基　　金：浙江省医药卫生平台计划项目(2016DTA008).

摘　　要：目的分析慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)机械通气患者营养风险状况与营养治疗策略的关系,为探索个体化营养治疗策略提供帮助。方法采用前瞻性多中心观察性研究方法。选择2015年1月至2016年1月入住浙江省10家县区级医院重症医学科(ICU)需要机械通气的COPD患者。依据营养风险筛查量表(NRS2002)评分将患者分为营养风险高危组(NRS2002评分3~5分)和极高危组(NRS2002评分6-7分)。比较两组患者营养实施状况和住院病死率;采用多因素Cox回归分析法分析影响COPD机械通气患者预后的危险因素;采用Kaplan-Meier曲线分析患者30 d预后;绘制受试者工作特征曲线(ROC),评价回归模型的检验效能。结果①共106例COPD机械通气患者纳入本研究,其中营养风险高危组患者90例,营养风险极高危组16例。两组患者性别、年龄和体质量指数(BMI)比较差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05);营养风险极高危组急性生理学与慢性健康状况评分U (APACHE H )、NRS2002评分均较营养风险高危组明显增高〔APACHE D(分):24.9±6.1 比 20.3±5.8, NRS2002 评分(分):6.3±0.5 比 4.2±0.8,均 PV0.05〕。②两组患者均在早期实施了肠内营养(EN)治疗,营养风险极高危组开始EN治疗的比例较营养风险高危组低〔12.5%(2/16)比17.7%(16/90)〕,随着住院时间延长,营养风险极高危组和营养风险高危组开始EN治疗的比例均逐渐增加,2 d后明显上升,入ICU 6 d达峰值〔分别为100.0%(16/16)、98.9%(89/90)〕;入ICU 3 d内营养风险极高危组开始EN比例较营养风险高危组明显降低,4 d起两组EN比例比较差异无统计学意义(均P>0.05)o营养风险极高危组和营养风险高危组开始肠外营养(PN)治疗的时间均较早(均为入ICU Id)、比例均较高〔分别为56.2%(9/16)和27.7%(25/90)],且PN比例未显示随着住院时间延长和EN热卡的增加而减少的趋势。营养风险极高危组开始PN治疗的比例更髙,入ICU 1 d即达到了 56.2%。�Objective To investigate the relationship between nutritional risk status and implementation of nutrition therapy in mechanical ventilated (MV) chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients, so as to provide evidence for individualized nutrition therapy. Methods A prospective multicenter observational study was conducted. MV COPD patients admitted to Department of Intensive Care Units (ICU) of 10 County Hospitals in Zhejiang Province from January 2015 to January 2016 were enrolled, and according to nutrition risk screening 2002 (NRS2002) score, they were divided into nutritional high risk group (NRS2OO2 3-5) and nutritional extremely high risk group (NRS2002 6-7). Nutrition therapy situation and hospital mortality were compared between the two groups;multivariate Cox regression analysis was used to analyze the risk factors affecting the prognosis of patients with COPD under mechanical ventilation. Kaplan-Meier curve was used to analyze the prognosis at 30 days;receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to test the robustness of multivariable regression analysis. Results ① One hundred and six COPD patients with MV were analyzed;among them, 90 patients were in the nutritional high risk group, and 16 were in the nutritional extremely high risk group. There were no significant differences in age, gender and body mass index (BMI) between the two groups (all P > 0.05);the acute physiology and chronic health evaluation U (APACHE U ) score, NRS2002 score in patients of nutrition risk extremely high group were obviously higher than that in patients with nutrition high risk group (APACHE II: 24.9 ±6.1 vs. 20.3 + 5.8, NRS2OO2 score: 6.3 + 0.5 vs. 4.2 ±0.8, both P < 0.05).② Patients in both groups received early enteral nutrition (EN) therapy, the proportion of patients in nutritional extremely high risk group received early EN was lower than that of patients in the nutritional high risk group [12.5%(2/16) vs. 17.7%(16/90)], along with the prolongation of hospital stay, the proportions of patients b

关 键 词：慢性阻塞性肺疾病 营养风险筛查评分 营养实施 

分 类 号：R472.9[医药卫生—护理学]