| Objectives:The purpose of the research is to study the diversity in treatment effect and comfort of AECOPD patients resulting from different flow of oxygen dynamic atomization. Therefore, the results will guide clinical nursing work.Methodology:The data cover120AECOPD in-patients who accepted oxygen dynamic atomization therapy in the Pneumology Department of Tianjin Haihe Hospital from September1st,2011to March10th,2012. According to different oxygen flow, subjects are divided into group A (3L/min), group B (5L/min) and group C (7L/min), and each group includes40patients. By means of questionnaire before oxygen inhalation therapy, baseline assessment is conducted. All patients using the veil medical atomizers, had accepted oxygen inhalation therapy with different oxygen flow2times a day for5consecutive days. Patients’ vital sign, difficulty of expectoration, sputum properties and phlegm production are recorded before the end of the first atomization, after the end of the first atomization in1hour and after5consecutive days of treatment (1hour after atomization). The second assessment is carried out by means of questionnaire on atomization comfort before the end of the first atomization. The entire data are statistically analyzed by the ware SPSS16.0.Results:1The baseline assessment is carried out before oxygen dynamic atomization. The diversity of group A, B and C in general information, condition, treatment program, oxygen inhalation therapy has no statistical significance (P>0.05).2The difference in temperature before and after treatment of all patients has no statistical significance. While in the process of atomization and after treatment of5consecutive days, respiratory rate slows down (P<0.05). In addition, the heart rate of patients in group C speeds up(P<0.05). Furthermore, in the process of atomization the average arterial pressure of all3groups declines (P<0.05). Meanwhile, the average arterial pressure of patients who have a history of high blood pressure in group C rises,(P<0.05). At last SpO2of all groups of patients rises in the process of atomization and5continuous days of atomization,(P<0.05).3Both blood PH and PaO2of3groups rises, but PaCO2declines after5consecutive days of atomization,(P<0.05).4Cough points of3groups reduce after atomization of5consecutive days (P<0.05). In addition, the difficulty of expectoration of both group B and C declines after the end of the first atomization in1hour, and group C improve larger than group B. After the treatment of5consecutive days, the difficulty of expectoration of all groups is declined (P<0.05), Moreover, there is no changer in sputum properties of3groups after the end of the first treatment in1hour. After treatment of5consecutive days, sputum properties of all groups are improved (P<0.05). Finally, there is no statistical significance on phlegm production after the end of the first treatment in1hour in group A and B, but group C is better than group A and B (P<0.05). After treatment of5consecutive days, there is no significant difference in phlegm production of3groups (P>0.05).5There is no statistical significance on comparison of difference in oxygen smell, temperature, discomfort of pharynx nasalis, sensation of lower respiratory tract, general sensation and irritant cough of3groups (P>0.05). On the contrary, there is statistical significance on oxygen flow rate, degree of oxygen wetness, palpitation and suffocation of3groups (P<0.05).Conclusions:1Negative impacts of7L/min of oxygen flow on pulse and blood pressure are higher than3L/min and5L/min of flow.2In the initial stage of treatment,7L/min of oxygen flow is better than3L/min and5L/min in treatment effect, but after atomization of5consecutive days there is no difference among three kinds.3In the aspect of atomization comfort,5L/min of flow is the best, and3L/min of flow ranks second, while7L/min of flow is the worse. |
PDF Full Text Request