Objective To study the treatment efficacy of two atomization method for chronic bronchitis .Method 102 patients with chronic bronchitis hospitalized in our department from January 2014 to December 2014 were ran‐domly divided into oxygen and machine group .Patients in oxygen group was using oxygen drived nebulizer inhala‐tion .Atomization inhaler with air flow of oxygen at 4~6 L/min .Patents in machine group was given air compres‐sion pump for atomizing inhalation ,4ml budesonide aerosol was used for inhalation for two group .Atomization time was 10~15 minutes ,two times a day for more than 5 days .Result SpO2 for both group of patients was improved . There was statistically significant differences before and after treatment (P<0 .05);The time intervals that sputum volume began to increase ,decrease and remained to stable between two groups were compared respectively .There was no statistically significant difference was observed (P>0 .05) ,the time intervals needed for coughing ,wheezing and wheezing rale to dissolve between the two groups were about the same on the whole ,and there was no statisti‐cally significant difference (P>0 .05) .Conclusion There was no statistically significant difference between the two methods of atomization for chronic bronchitis .%目的：探讨两种不同雾化方法治疗慢性支气管炎的临床效果。方法选择2014年1－12月我科收治的慢性支气管炎患者102例，随机分为氧气组和机器组，氧气组采用氧气驱动雾化吸入器进行雾化吸入，作为气源的氧流量为4～6 L／m in ；机器组采用压缩雾化吸入机（德国百瑞）进行雾化吸入。两组雾化吸入药物均为吸入用布地奈德混悬液4 mL。雾化时间均为10～15 min／次，2次／d ，连续雾化5 d以上。结果两组患者SpO2均较治疗前改善，治疗前后比较差异有统计学意义（P＜0．05）；比较两组雾化吸入后痰量增多的时间，痰量开始减少的时间以及痰量稳定的时间，两组比较差异无统计学意义（P＞0．05）；治疗后两组患者在咳嗽消失时间、喘息消失时间以及哮鸣音消失时间均无差异（P＞0．05）。结论两种雾化方法治疗慢性支气管炎的疗效无明显差异。
展开▼
