头盔式与面罩式无创通气对新型冠状病毒肺炎患者治疗效果的比较：一项随机对照研究
Comparison of Effect of Non-invasive Ventilation Delivered by Helmet vs Face Mask in Patients with COVID-19 Infection: A Randomized Control Study.
作者信息
Saxena Anupriya, Nazir Nazia, Pandey Ruchi, Gupta Savita
机构信息
Anaesthesia, Government Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Government Institute of Medical Sciences, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India.
出版信息
Indian J Crit Care Med. 2022 Mar;26(3):282-287. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10071-24155.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
We compared the effectiveness of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) provided by helmet mask vs face mask in patients with COVID-19.
METHODS AND MATERIALS
Between March and May 2021, a single-center, prospective, open-label randomized controlled research was undertaken. Sixty patients were randomly assigned to one of two groups based on the NIV delivery interface. In group I ( = 30) helmet mask was used and in group II ( = 30) face mask was used for delivery of NIV. The proportion of patients in each group who required endotracheal intubation was the primary outcome. The duration of NIV, length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU), hospital mortality, ratio of partial pressure of oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO/FiO), respiratory rate, patient comfort, and complications were all documented as secondary outcomes.
RESULTS
In both groups, demographics, clinical characteristics, and treatment received were comparable. Around 10% of patients in the helmet mask group were intubated, while 43.3% of patients in the face mask group were intubated ( = 0.004). The two groups demonstrated similar hemodynamic patterns. The use of a helmet mask, on the other hand, resulted in enhanced oxygenation (263.57 ± 31.562 vs 209.33 ± 20.531, = 0.00), higher patient satisfaction ( = 0.001), a lower risk of complications, and a shorter NIV and ICU stay ( = 0.001) (4.53 ± 0.776 vs 7.60 ± 1.354, = 0.00 and 6.37 ± 0.556 vs 11.57 ± 2.161, = 0.00).
CONCLUSION
Helmet mask could be a reliable interface for delivery of NIV in COVID-19 and results in a lower rate of endotracheal intubation, better oxygenation with greater patient comfort and shorter ICU stay as compared to face mask used for NIV.
HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE
Saxena A, Nazir N, Pandey R, Gupta S. Comparison of Effect of Non-invasive Ventilation Delivered by Helmet vs Face Mask in Patients with COVID-19 Infection: A Randomized Control Study. Indian J Crit Care Med 2022;26(3):282-287.
背景与目的
我们比较了头盔面罩与面罩用于新型冠状病毒肺炎（COVID-19）患者无创通气（NIV）的有效性。
方法与材料
2021年3月至5月间，开展了一项单中心、前瞻性、开放标签的随机对照研究。根据无创通气的输送界面，将60例患者随机分为两组。第一组（n = 30）使用头盔面罩，第二组（n = 30）使用面罩进行无创通气。每组中需要气管插管的患者比例为主要结局指标。无创通气持续时间、重症监护病房（ICU）住院时间、医院死亡率、氧分压与吸入氧分数比（PaO₂/FiO₂）、呼吸频率、患者舒适度及并发症均记录为次要结局指标。
结果
两组患者的人口统计学特征、临床特点及接受的治疗具有可比性。头盔面罩组约10%的患者接受了插管，而面罩组43.3%的患者接受了插管（P = 0.004）。两组血流动力学模式相似。另一方面，使用头盔面罩可改善氧合（263.57 ± 31.562 vs 209.33 ± 20.531，P = 0.00），提高患者满意度（P = 0.001），降低并发症风险，缩短无创通气时间及ICU住院时间（P = 0.001）（4.53 ± 0.776 vs 7.60 ± 1.354，P = 0.00；6.37 ± 0.556 vs 11.57 ± 2.161，P = 0.00）。
结论
与用于无创通气的面罩相比，头盔面罩可能是COVID-19患者无创通气的可靠界面，可降低气管插管率，改善氧合，提高患者舒适度，缩短ICU住院时间。
如何引用本文
Saxena A, Nazir N, Pandey R, Gupta S. Comparison of Effect of Non-invasive Ventilation Delivered by Helmet vs Face Mask in Patients with COVID-19 Infection: A Randomized Control Study. Indian J Crit Care Med 2022;26(3):282-287.
Zotero 插件