BiPAP呼吸机加热湿化器与过水湿化器在治疗Ⅱ型呼吸衰竭中的应用价值分析

摘要

目的:分析双水平式呼吸道正压(BiPAP)呼吸机加热湿化器与过水湿化器在治疗Ⅱ型呼吸衰竭中的应用价值.方法:选取50例Ⅱ型呼吸衰竭患者,依据BiPAP呼吸机湿化装置的不同将其分为加热湿化器组和过水湿化器组,每组25例.加热湿化器组BiPAP呼吸机采用加热湿化器,过水湿化器组BiPAP呼吸机采用过水湿化器.对两组患者治疗前后的血氧分压(PaO2)、二氧化碳分压(PaCO2)、pH值以及湿化器对患者上气道干燥感的影响进行统计分析.结果:加热湿化器组患者的PaO2、pH值均显著高于过水湿化器组,差异有统计学意义(t=4.303,t=3.182;P<0.05);PaCO2显著低于过水湿化器组,差异有统计学意义(t=6.965,P<0.05).上气道干燥感对比中,加热湿化器组无干燥比例为84.0%(21/25),过水湿化器组为32.0%(8/25),加热湿化器组显著高于过水湿化器组,差异有统计学意义(x2=12.83,P<0.05);加热湿化器组干燥感一般的比例为16.0%(4/25),过水湿化器组为40.0%(10/25),加热湿化器组显著低于过水湿化器组,差异有统计学意义(x2=5.02,P<0.05);加热湿化器组干燥感差的比例为0,过水湿化器组为28.0%(7/25),加热湿化器组显著低于过水湿化器组,差异有统计学意义(x2=7.38,P<0.05).结论:在BiPAP呼吸机治疗Ⅱ型呼吸衰竭中,加热湿化器应用价值及效果较过水湿化器高,值得在临床推广使用.%Objective: To analyze the application value of heated humidifier and water humidifier of BiPAP ventilator in the treatment of type II respiratory failure. Methods: The clinical data of 50 patients with type II respiratory failure were statistically analyzed, and these patients were divided into heated humidifier group (adopted heated humidifier, n=25) and water humidifier group (adopted water humidifier, n=25) according to the difference of humidifying device of BiPAP ventilator. The PaO2, PaCO2, pH and the effect of humidifier for upper respiratory tract with dry sensation between pre-and post treatment were analyzed by statistical method. Results: The values of PaO2and pH of heated humidifier group were significantly higher than that of water humidifier group (t=4.303, t=3.182, P<0.05), respectively. While the PaCO2of heated humidifier group was significantly lower than that of water humidifier group (t=6.965, P<0.05). In the contrast of dry sensation of upper respiratory tract, the ratio of non-dry sensation in heated humidifier group was 84.0% (21/25) and it was 32.0% (8/25) in water humidification group, and the difference between the two groups was significant (x2=12.83, P<0.05). And the ratio of general dry sensation in heated humidifier group was 16.0% (4/25) and it was 40.0% (10/25) in water humidification group, and the ratio of heated humidifier group was significantly lower than that of water humidifier group (x2=5.02, P<0.05). Besides, the ratio of worst dry sensation in heated humidifier group was 0 and it was 28.0% (7/25) in water humidifier group, and the ratio of heated humidifier group was significantly lower than that of water humidifier group (x2=7.38, P<0.05). Conclusion: In the treatment of type II respiratory failure by using BiPAP ventilator, the application value and effect of heated humidifier is higher than that of water humidifier, so it is worthy to promote and use the heated humidifier in clinical practice.