论文部分内容阅读
目的:分析探讨肺炎患儿的治疗中两种雾化吸入法治疗的效果对比。方法:研究对象选取2014年10月至2015年10月我院收治的160例肺炎的患儿,随机分为对照组80例(采用压缩雾化机吸入法治疗)和观察组80例(氧气驱动雾化吸入法治疗),对比两组患儿症状改善和住院的时间以及治疗的临床效果。结果:观察组患儿肺部罗音、咳嗽咳痰、发热、呼吸困难等症状消失和住院的时间明显短于对照组患儿肺部罗音、咳嗽咳痰、发热、呼吸困难等症状消失和住院的时间,对照组患儿总有效率(53例,66.25%)明显低于观察组患儿总有效率(73例,91.25%),统计学上有意义(P<0.05)。结论:肺炎患儿的治疗中采用氧气驱动雾化吸入法临床效果明显优于压缩雾化机吸入法,临床上值得大力推广使用。
OBJECTIVE: To analyze and compare the effects of two kinds of inhalation therapy in the treatment of children with pneumonia. Methods: The subjects included 160 children with pneumonia admitted from October 2014 to October 2015 in our hospital were randomly divided into control group (n = 80) (treated with inhalation of compressed atomizer) and observation group (n = 80) Atomization inhalation therapy), compared two groups of children to improve symptoms and hospitalization time and the clinical effect of treatment. Results: The disappearance and hospitalization time of lung rales, cough and sputum, fever and dyspnea in the observation group were significantly shorter than those in the control group, including pulmonary rales, cough and sputum, fever and dyspnea The total effective rate (53 cases, 66.25%) in the control group was significantly lower than that in the observation group (73 cases, 91.25%) at the time of hospitalization, which was statistically significant (P <0.05). Conclusion: The treatment of pneumonia in children with oxygen-driven inhalation method is significantly better than the clinical effect of compression atomizer inhalation, it is worth to promote the use of clinically.