Kauffmann F, Drouet D, Brille D, Hatzfeld C, Liot F, Kompalitch M
Rev Fr Mal Respir. 1979 Jul-Aug;7(4):370-6.
A survey has been conducted among French chest physicians and physicians involved in intensive care. 296 physicians have prescribed IPPB at home to 3 778 patients with chronic respiratory insufficiency between 1960 and 1977. Acute respiratory failure was the first criteria considered in the indications (57% of the patients); hypercapnia, hypoxemia and right heart failure episode frequency were the other criteria of severity the most often taken into account. Since 1960, the indications among those with airflow obstruction have decreased, whereas they have increased for those with restrictive insufficiencies, expressing the questions raised about the efficacy of IPPB in these two types. 18% of the patients have had IPPB through tracheostomy canula. 70% of the patients have used a pressure cycling respirator and 30% a volume or flow cycling respiratory. This second type was quite always used in the case of IPPB through canula. Oxygen was added for half of the patients. The physicians have regularly followed the patients. Great importance was accorded to home care surveillance.
一项针对法国胸科医生和重症监护医生的调查已经展开。在1960年至1977年间，296名医生曾在家中为3778名慢性呼吸功能不全患者开具间歇性正压通气（IPPB）治疗。急性呼吸衰竭是适应证中首先考虑的标准（57%的患者）；高碳酸血症、低氧血症和右心衰竭发作频率是最常考虑的其他严重程度标准。自1960年以来，气流阻塞患者的适应证有所减少，而限制性通气不足患者的适应证则有所增加，这反映了人们对IPPB在这两种类型疾病中疗效的质疑。18%的患者通过气管造口插管接受IPPB治疗。70%的患者使用压力控制型呼吸机，30%使用容量或流量控制型呼吸机。第二种类型在通过插管进行IPPB治疗的情况下几乎总是被使用。一半的患者补充了氧气。医生定期对患者进行随访。家庭护理监测受到高度重视。
