A Study Of The Clinical Efficacy Of Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation In The Treatment Of Respiratory Distress Syndrome In Premature Infant

Objective:This study through using nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation(NIPPV) or nasal continuous positive airway pressure(NCPAP) to treat premature infant respiratory distress syndrome(NRDS), compared the clinical effect of the two groups.Methods: 70 premature infants who were diagnosed with NRDS were divided into NIPPV group and NCPAP group by using random numbers.Each group had 35 cases.Babies in NIPPV group used NIPPV to improve breathing when they were in hospital. Babies in NCPAP group used NCPAP to improve breathing when they were in hospital. Regular treatments were given for specific clinical symptoms, and plenty of pulmonary surfactant(PS) was given to both groups within 12 hours after they were born. By collecting gestational age,birth weight,delivery mode,birth time;by recording the time of using PS, oxygen, noninvasive ventilation, tracheal intubation, mechanical ventilation time,results of blood gas analysis;by collecting the complications and prognosis; and by using methods of the two sample t test, ?2 test, variance analysis,the results were statistically analyzed, and the clinical effect of two groups was compared.Result: 1. The difference of two groups in the delivery way,gestational age,sex, birth weight, the time in hospital, and the time of using pulmonary surfactant was not significant, and the result had good comparability(P>0.05). 2. The partial pressure of arterial oxygen and carbon dioxide in two groups showed that,the partial pressure of oxygen increased faster and the partial pressure of carbon dioxide decreased faster in NIPPV group than that of NCPAP group(P<0.05). 3. The number of P/F and a/APO2 in two groups showed that,the number of P/F and a/APO2 in NIPPV group increased faster than that of NCPAP group(P<0.05). 4. The time of using breathing machine and oxygen showed that, the time of NIPPV group was lower than that of NCPAP group(P<0.05). 5. The comparison of treatment success rates showed that, the rate of NIPPV group was more higher than that of NCPAP group(P<0.05). 6. The comparison of complications and outcomes of the two groups showed that, the incidence rate of CO2 retention, abdominal distension and intubation again in NIPPV group was lower than that of NCPAP group(P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence rate of nasal injury, gas leakage and intracranial bleeding(P>0.05). 7. The comparison of the prognosis in two groups showed that,there was no significant difference in good prognosis, BPD and death.(P>0.05).Conclusion: Compared with NCPAP, NIPPV not only had the advantage of decreasing the patient's oxygen concentration in short time, increasing oxygen saturation, improving pulmonary oxygenation function, and avoiding carbon dioxide retention, but also had the advantage of shortening ventilation time and oxygen time, improving the survival rate, and improving the quality of life.