| Objective Comparison of clinical efficacy and safety of nasal high-flow oxygen therapy and non-invasive positive pressure ventilation in the treatment of elderly AECOPD.Methods A total of 100 elderly patients with AECOPD admitted to our department from June 2017 to December 2018 were enrolled.The patients were divided into HFNC group(experimental group)and NPPV group(control group).The two groups were given anti-infective and antispasmodic drugs.Routine treatment such as asthma,phlegm and cough,and improved circulation.The respiratory rate,heart rate,laboratory index changes,disease outcomes,hospitalization days and medical expenses before and after treatment were compared between the two groups,and the changes of laboratory indexes in patients with typeⅡ respiratory failure or heart failure were further observed.Result ①Each group can effectively improve clinical symptoms,and PaO2,SaO2,PH,PaCO2,WBC,NEUT,and CRP are significantly improved compared with before treatment.RBC,HGB,PLT and other indicators have no significant changes before and after treatment.There were no significant differences in laboratory indicators,clinical outcomes,length of hospital stay,and hospitalization costs between the two groups after treatment.②In the HFNC group,PaO2 and SaO2 increased faster and more stable,but the early improvement of PH and PaCO2 was not obvious.The early improvement of PH and PaCO2 in NPPV group was obvious,while the growth rate of PaO2 and SaO2 was relatively slow.③In terms of satisfaction and comfort,the HFNC group was superior to the NPPV group(P<0.05).Conclusion ①In the correction of hypoxia,HFNC is superior to NPPV,and is more suitable for elderly AECOPD with simple hypoxia.However,for AECOPD patients with significant carbon dioxide retention or complicated cardiac insufficiency,NPPV is superior to HFNC.②For elderly patients with AECOPD,HFNC treatment is more comfortable than NPPV,and patients are more tolerant. |
PDF Full Text Request