Roberts C M, Ryland I, Lowe D, Kelly Y, Bucknall C E, Pearson M G
Clinical Effectiveness and Evaluation Unit, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK.
Eur Respir J. 2001 Mar;17(3):343-9. doi: 10.1183/09031936.01.17303430.
Despite publication of several management guidelines for COPD, relatively little is known about standards of care in clinical practice. Data were collected on the management of 1400 cases of acute admission with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in 38 UK hospitals to compare clinical practice against the recommended British Thoracic Society standards. Variation in the process of care between the different centres was analysed and a comparison of the management by respiratory specialists and nonrespiratory specialists made. There were large variations between centres for many of the variables studied. A forced expiratory volume in one second measurement was found in only 53% of cases. Of the investigations recommended in the acute management arterial blood gases were performed in 79% (interhospital range 40-100%) of admissions and oxygen was formally prescribed in only 64% (range 9-94%). Of those cases with acidosis and hypercapnia 35% had no further blood gas analysis and only 13% received ventilatory support. Long-term management was also deficient with 246 cases known to be severely hypoxic on admission yet two-thirds had no confirmation that oxygen levels had returned to levels above the requirements for long-term oxygen therapy. Only 30% of current smokers had cessation advice documented. To conclude, the median standards of care observed fell below those recommended by the guidelines. The lowest levels of performance were for patients not under the respiratory specialists, but specialists also have room for improvement. The substantial variation in the process of care between hospitals is strong evidence that it is possible for other centres with poorer performance to improve their levels of care.
尽管已经发表了几份慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)的管理指南,但对于临床实践中的护理标准却知之甚少。收集了英国38家医院1400例慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性入院病例的管理数据,以将临床实践与英国胸科学会推荐的标准进行比较。分析了不同中心之间护理过程的差异,并对呼吸专科医生和非呼吸专科医生的管理情况进行了比较。在所研究的许多变量方面,各中心之间存在很大差异。仅在53%的病例中进行了一秒用力呼气量测量。在急性管理中推荐的检查中,79%(医院间范围为40 - 100%)的入院患者进行了动脉血气分析,而仅64%(范围为9 - 94%)的患者正式开具了氧气处方。在那些存在酸中毒和高碳酸血症的病例中,35%没有进一步的血气分析,只有13%接受了通气支持。长期管理也存在不足,已知有246例患者入院时严重缺氧,但三分之二的患者没有确认氧气水平是否已恢复到高于长期氧疗要求的水平。只有30%的当前吸烟者有戒烟建议的记录。总之,观察到的护理标准中位数低于指南推荐的标准。表现最差的是那些不由呼吸专科医生负责的患者,但专科医生也有改进的空间。医院之间护理过程的巨大差异有力地证明,其他表现较差的中心有可能提高其护理水平。