摘要
目的比较采用非湿化给氧与普通气泡湿化给氧对低流量鼻导管氧疗患者氧疗舒适度及氧疗效果的影响。方法将150例在呼吸科住院且接受低流量鼻导管氧疗的患者按照入院时间随机分为观察组72例和对照组78例,观察组患者用干燥的湿化瓶直接吸氧,对照组患者常规用无菌蒸馏水湿化吸氧,分别比较两组患者实施氧疗第3、第5天氧疗舒适度(氧气气味、氧气湿润度、鼻咽部感觉)及氧疗效果(咳嗽程度、咳痰难度、痰量、痰液性状及经皮血氧饱和度)的差异。结果氧疗第3、第5天两组患者在氧疗舒适度和氧疗效果方面差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论采用非湿化给氧对低流量鼻导管氧疗患者的氧疗舒适度及氧疗效果不产生影响,且有利于降低吸氧患者医源性感染的发生率和减少护理工作量。
Objective To compare the comfort and effect of two oxygen therapies through low-flow nasal cannula.Methods 150 patients receiving low-flow oxygen therapy were randomly divided into control group（n=78） and observation group（n=72）.In observation group,patients received nonhumidified oxygen therapy,while in control group,patients received humidified oxygen therapy.The comfort of patients and effect of the therapy in the 3rd and 5th day of the therapy were compared.Results There was no significant difference of the comfort and effect between patients receiving nonhumidified and humidified oxygen therapy.Conclusion Nonhumidified oxygen therapy exerts no influence on the comfort and effect of low-flow oxygen therapy by nasal cannula and it can prevent hospital-acquired infection.
出处
《护理学报》
2011年第10期37-39,共3页
Journal of Nursing（China）
关键词
鼻导管氧疗
低流量
非湿化
舒适度
效果
nasal cannula oxygen therapy
low-flow
nonhumidified oxygen administration
comfort of oxygen therapy
effect of oxygen therapy
