Suppr超能文献

CPAP 接口:满意度和副作用。

CPAP interface: satisfaction and side effects.

机构信息

Sleep Unit, Pulmonary Department, Helsinki University Hospital, P.O. Box 160, Helsinki 00029, Finland.

出版信息

Sleep Breath. 2013 May;17(2):667-72. doi: 10.1007/s11325-012-0740-0. Epub 2012 Jul 5.

Abstract

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate the care receiver's satisfaction with the continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) interfaces.

METHODS

A questionnaire with visual analog scales was sent to all our CPAP patients (0 = absolutely unsatisfied, 100 = very satisfied). From the ResMed ResScan program, we obtained the CPAP daily use and air leak values.

RESULTS

We received 730 answers (70 % of participants); females comprised 22 %. A total of 391 patients had ResMed interfaces, 227 had Respironics, 87 had Fisher & Paykel (F&P), and 25 patients had other interfaces. Interfaces were nasal for 79 %, nasal pillows for 9 %, oronasal for 9 %, and unidentified for 3 % of cases. The mean ± SD satisfaction rate was 68 ± 25. No statistically significant differences were found regarding the type or brand of interface, previous interface experience, or the age or gender of the patient. Users of ResMed interfaces had significantly (p < 0.01) fewer cases of disturbing leaks than did users of Respironics or F&P interfaces (60 vs. 70 and 72 %, respectively). The ResMed Ultra Mirage interface had the fewest cases of disturbing leaks. Values for the measured median leaks were a mean of 5.9 ± 7.2 l/min, and those for the maximum leaks were 39.3 ± 22.2 l/min with no differences between brands. The users of F&P interfaces experienced significantly (p < 0.01) more comfort and used the CPAP device significantly (p < 0.007) more than did users of ResMed or Respironics interfaces (88 % of cases vs. 65 and 57 % and 6.2 ± 2.6 vs. 5.3 ± 2.8 or 5.8 ± 2.8 h/day, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of patients consider the use of the CPAP interface disturbing even though the satisfaction rate is good with no differences between brands.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在评估护理接受者对持续气道正压通气(CPAP)接口的满意度。

方法

我们向所有 CPAP 患者发送了一份带有视觉模拟量表的问卷(0=非常不满意,100=非常满意)。从 ResMed ResScan 程序中,我们获得了 CPAP 的日常使用和空气泄漏值。

结果

我们收到了 730 份回答(占参与者的 70%);女性占 22%。共有 391 名患者使用 ResMed 接口,227 名患者使用 Respironics 接口,87 名患者使用 Fisher & Paykel(F&P)接口,25 名患者使用其他接口。接口类型为鼻式占 79%,鼻枕式占 9%,口鼻式占 9%,无法识别的占 3%。满意度平均值为 68±25。接口类型或品牌、患者之前的接口使用经验、年龄或性别与满意度之间没有显著差异。使用 ResMed 接口的患者发生扰流漏的情况明显(p<0.01)少于使用 Respironics 或 F&P 接口的患者(分别为 60%、70%和 72%)。ResMed Ultra Mirage 接口扰流漏的发生率最低。测量的中位泄漏值的平均值为 5.9±7.2 l/min,最大泄漏值为 39.3±22.2 l/min,各品牌之间无差异。使用 F&P 接口的患者舒适度明显(p<0.01)更高,使用 CPAP 设备的时间明显(p<0.007)更长,分别为 88%、65%、57%和 6.2±2.6、5.3±2.8、5.8±2.8 h/天。

结论

尽管品牌之间的满意度没有差异,但大多数患者认为 CPAP 接口的使用存在干扰。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验