2018Zhongguo jiceng yiyaoRequires access

Application effect of prone position ventilation in the treatment of acute respiratory distress syndrome

Yanhong Li

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Objective To explore the clinical effect and nursing experience of prone position ventilation for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome(ARDS). Methods From June 2015 to June 2017, 60 patients with ARDS in the Fourth People's Hospital of Linfen were selected and divided into observation group and control group according to different ventilation methods, with 30 cases in each group.The control group was treated with supine mechanical ventilation, the observation group was treated with prone position ventilation.The clinical efficacy of the two groups was compared. Results The mean duration of on-boarding and hospital stay in the observation group were (13.72±2.14)d and (21.96±4.35)d, respectively, which were significantly shorter than those in the control group[(18.63±3.12)d, (35.21±5.27)d], the differences were statistically significant(t=7.11, 10.62, all P 0.05). After 12 hours of treatment, the pH in the control group had no change(P>0.05), the other indicators in the two groups were significantly improved(all P<0.05), and the improvement effect in the observation group was significantly better than those in the control group(t=8.55, 19.25, 3.46, all P<0.05). Conclusion Prone position ventilation in the treatment of patients with ARDS has significant clinical efficacy, can effectively improve the patients' blood oxygen indicators, and has mild adverse reactions with a high clinical value. Key words: Respiratory distress syndrome, adult; Respiratory insufficiency; Respiration, artificial; Ventilators, mechanical; Prone position; Posture; Controlled clinical trial

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Objective To explore the clinical effect and nursing experience of prone position ventilation for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome(ARDS). Methods From June 2015 to June 2017, 60 patients with ARDS in the Fourth People's Hospital of Linfen were selected and divided into observation group and control group according to different ventilation methods, with 30 cases in each group.The control group was treated with supine mechanical ventilation, the observation group was treated with prone position ventilation.The clinical efficacy of the two groups was compared. Results The mean duration of on-boarding and hospital stay in the observation group were (13.72±2.14)d and (21.96±4.35)d, respectively, which were significantly shorter than those in the control group[(18.63±3.12)d, (35.21±5.27)d], the differences were statistically significant(t=7.11, 10.62, all P 0.05). After 12 hours of treatment, the pH in the control group had no change(P>0.05), the other indicators in the two groups were significantly improved(all P<0.05), and the improvement effect in the observation group was significantly better than those in the control group(t=8.55, 19.25, 3.46, all P<0.05). Conclusion Prone position ventilation in the treatment of patients with ARDS has significant clinical efficacy, can effectively improve the patients' blood oxygen indicators, and has mild adverse reactions with a high clinical value. Key words: Respiratory distress syndrome, adult; Respiratory insufficiency; Respiration, artificial; Ventilators, mechanical; Prone position; Posture; Controlled clinical trial

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Objective To explore the clinical effect and nursing experience of prone position ventilation for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome(ARDS). Methods From June 2015 to June 2017, 60 patients with ARDS in the Fourth People's Hospital of Linfen were selected and divided into observation group and control group according to different ventilation methods, with 30 cases in each group.The control group was treated with supine mechanical ventilation, the observation group was treated with prone position ventilation.The clinical efficacy of the two groups was compared. Results The mean duration of on-boarding and hospital stay in the observation group were (13.72±2.14)d and (21.96±4.35)d, respectively, which were significantly shorter than those in the control group[(18.63±3.12)d, (35.21±5.27)d], the differences were statistically significant(t=7.11, 10.62, all P 0.05). After 12 hours of treatment, the pH in the control group had no change(P>0.05), the other indicators in the two groups were significantly improved(all P<0.05), and the improvement effect in the observation group was significantly better than those in the control group(t=8.55, 19.25, 3.46, all P<0.05). Conclusion Prone position ventilation in the treatment of patients with ARDS has significant clinical efficacy, can effectively improve the patients' blood oxygen indicators, and has mild adverse reactions with a high clinical value. Key words: Respiratory distress syndrome, adult; Respiratory insufficiency; Respiration, artificial; Ventilators, mechanical; Prone position; Posture; Controlled clinical trial

Key concepts: Medicine, ARDS, Supine position, Prone position, Ventilation (architecture), Acute respiratory distress, Anesthesia, Mechanical ventilation

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source