Effect of transnasal high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy and nasal catheter oxygen therapy on patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease complicated with type Ⅱ respiratory failure#br#
ZHANG Yanxi SHANG Longmei RUI Xiaoyan▲
Department of Respiratory, the First People’s Hospital of Chuzhou, Anhui Province, Chuzhou 239000, China
Abstract：Objective To explore the therapeutic effect of transnasal high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (HFNC) and nasal catheter oxygen therapy (NCO) on patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) complicated with type Ⅱ respiratory failure. Methods A total of 80 patients with AECOPD complicated with type Ⅱ respiratory failure admitted to Department of Respiratory, the First People’s Hospital of Chuzhou of Anhui Province from March 2018 to March 2021 were selected as the research objects. The patients were divided into observation group and control group by random number table method, with 40 cases in each group. HFNC was added to the basic treatment in the observation group, and NCO was added to basic treatment in the control group. The total treatment time of two groups was more than or equal to three days. The heart rate, respiratory rate and mean arterial pressure of the two groups before and after treatment were compared. Arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2), partial pressure of carbon dioxide in arterial blood (PaCO2), and partial pressure of oxygen in arterial blood / fractional concentration of inspiratory oxygen (PaO2/FiO2) of the two groups before and after treatment were compared. The comfort level of treatment was investigated at discharge. Results After three days of treatment, heart rate, respiratory rate and mean arterial pressure in two groups were significantly decreased compared with before treatment, and observation group was lower than control group, the differences were statistically significant (P ＜ 0.05). After three days of treatment, the levels of PaO2 and PaO2/FiO2 in two groups were significantly increased compared with before treatment, and PaCO2 was significantly decreased compared with before treatment, the differences were statistically significant (P ＜ 0.05). There were no significant differences in PaO2, PaCO2, and PaO2/FiO2 levels between two groups before and after three days of treatment (P ＞ 0.05). Comparison of treatment comfort between the two groups showed highly statistically significant difference (P ＜ 0.01). Conclusion HFNC and NCO both have relatively stable efficacy for patients with AECOPD combined with type Ⅱ respiratory failure, but HFNC has a better remission rate and treatment comfort compared with NCO. HFNC can be widely used for patients requiring oxygen therapy in clinical practice.
京公网安备 11010502046598号