Objective To assess different effects of exercise therapy and traditional methods on patients with mechanical ventilation by meta-analysis. Methods Various databases were researched and all the randomized controlled trials were included to obtain data on patients using mechanical ventilation with exercise therapy. After evaluating the quality of included studies and extraction of the data, the software of RewMan 5.0 was used to. Results A total of 202 articles were retrieved, but only 4 were included. Meta- analysis showed that there was no difference between exercise therapy and traditional methods in reducing PaCO2 in patients, but exercise therapy was superior to traditional methods in the training of grip (WMD 22.87, 95%CI 1.39~44.35) and the time of raising the legs (WMD 5.27, 95%CI 0.77~9.77). Conclusion Patients with exercise therapy achieve better rehabilitation compared with those with traditional methods. However, since only a few articles were included, so large-scale randomized controlled trials of higher quality are in need to confirm the result.%目的 采用Meta分析方法综合评价运动干预与传统干预对机械通气患者的影响.方法 制定原始文献的纳入标准、排除标准和检索策略,检索多个数据库,获得运动干预机械通气患者的临床随机对照试验文献,进行文献评价后,采用RewMan 5.0软件进行数据分析.结果 共检出202篇相关文献,经筛选最终纳入4篇进行Meta分析.分析显示:运动干预组机械通气患者的握力、抬腿时间均优于对照组.其权重的均数差值(95%CI)分别为22.87(1.39,44.35)、5.27(0.77,9.77);对患者PaCO2的比较,差异无统计学意义,但显示运动疗法有降低患者PaCO2的趋势.结论 实施运动疗法干预的机械通气患者治疗效果优于传统干预疗法的患者.由于目前开展相关研究较少,需要大样本、多中心的随机对照试验来进一步确认这种干预效果.
展开▼
