临床荟萃

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

不同镇静程度在成人ICU机械通气患者中的回顾性分析

  

  1. 郑州大学第五附属医院 重症医学科,河南 郑州  450052
  • 出版日期:2017-09-05 发布日期:2017-09-08
  • 通讯作者: 通信作者:卜克,Email: fenglang1240@163.com

Retrospectively analysis of different degree of sedation in  patients with  mechanical ventilation in adult ICU

  1. Department of Critical Care Medicine,  the Fifth Affiliated Hospital  of
    Zhengzhou University,  Zhengzhou 450052,   China
  • Online:2017-09-05 Published:2017-09-08
  • Contact: Corresponding auther: Bu Ke,Email: fenglang1240@163.com

摘要: 目的评价不同镇静程度在机械通气患者治疗中的有效性及安全性。方法回顾性分析我科2014年1月至2016年12月收治的405例有创械通气治疗大于48小时的患者的临床资料,根据不同镇静方法分为间断镇静组(192例)和持续镇静组(213例),根据Ricker镇静-躁动评分(SAS评分)将持续镇静患者分为浅镇静组(SAS评分2~3级)和深镇静组(SAS评分4~5级)。每组均给予芬太尼持续镇痛,异丙酚或咪达唑仑镇静,比较各组机械通气时间、ICU住院时间、总住院时间,住院病死率,并发症及不良事件发生率。结果间断镇静组机械通气时间低于持续镇静组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),两组ICU住院时间,总住院时间及住院病死率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。与持续浅镇静组相比,持续深镇静组机械通气时间、ICU住院时间及总住院时间明显延长,持续深镇静组呼吸机相关性肺炎(VAP)发生率明显增高(均P<0.05),住院病死率,谵妄及意外拔管发生率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论机械通气过程中应用间断镇静与持续镇静都是可行的,但持续浅镇静缩短机械通气及ICU住院时间,VAP发生率明显减少。

关键词: 呼吸, 人工, 清醒镇静, 深度镇静, 重症监护病房

Abstract: Objective  To evaluate the efficacy and safety of different degree of sedation in the treatment of patients with mechanical ventilation.  Methods  405 patients who received  mechanical ventilation over 48 hour from January 2014 to December 2016 in ICU of  the hospital  were enrolled. According to different methods of sedation, the patients were divided into intermittent sedation group (192 patients) and continuous sedation group (213 patients). The patients with continuous sedation were divided into light sedation group (SAS score 23) and deep sedation group (SAS score 45) according to the SAS scores. Each group was given fentanyl for analgesia and propofol or midazolam for sedation. Duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU hospitalization time, total hospitalization time, hospitalization fatality rate and incidence of complications and adverse events were recorded.Results  Compared with the continuous sedation group,the duration of mechanical ventilation  were significantly shorter than the intermittent sedation group(P<0.05). ICU hospitalization time, total hospitalization time, hospitalization fatality rate showed no significant differences between two groups(P>0.05). In the continuous sedation group, with continuous light sedation group compared to continuous deep sedation group, mechanical ventilation time, ICU hospitalization time  and total hospitalization time  were significantly longer and the incidence of VAP  was significantly higher in continuous deep sedation group (all P<0.05).Compared with the last light sedation group for deep sedation group,the mechanical ventilation time and ICU length of hospital stay, the total length of hospital stay and the incidence of VAP were significantly longer in the continuous light sedation group (all P<0.05).Hospital mortality, the incidence of delirium and accidental extubation of two groups had no statistical significance (P>0.05). Conclusion  Intermittent sedation and continuous sedation were feasible during mechanical ventilation, but the incidence of VAP was significantly reduced by continued shallow sedation, shortened mechanical ventilation and ICU hospitalization time.

Key words: respiration, artificial; , conscious sedation;deep , sedation;intensive care units