Suppr超能文献

间歇性强制通气能加速撤机吗?

Does intermittent mandatory ventilation accelerate weaning?

作者信息

Schachter E N, Tucker D, Beck G J

出版信息

JAMA. 1981 Sep 11;246(11):1210-4.

PMID:7021889
Abstract

Intermittent mandatory ventilation (IMV) was introduced to facilitate the weaning of patients from mechanical ventilation. The outcome of ventilator management in 116 patients who were treated in the first three months of 1975 was compared retrospectively with that of 135 patients who were treated in the first three months of 1976. All patients who were treated in 1975 received conventional (assisted or controlled) mechanical ventilation. In 1976, seventy-seven patients (57%) were treated with the use of IMV, and 58 (43%) were treated with the use of conventional mechanical ventilation. Sixty-five patients who were treated in 1976 with the use of IMV were matched with patients who were treated in 1975 with the use of conventional ventilation, on the basis of age, sex, race, history of pulmonary disease, smoking history, diagnosis, service, and location of therapy. The average time spent on a ventilator by the IMV patients was 145 hours, whereas the matched control patients spent 142 hours. The length of hospitalization was 36 days for the IMV patients and 30 days for the control patients. These time periods were not significantly different and indicate that IMV did not reduce the length of ventilator management.

摘要

间歇性强制通气(IMV)被引入以促进患者从机械通气中撤机。回顾性比较了1975年第一季度接受治疗的116例患者与1976年第一季度接受治疗的135例患者的呼吸机管理结果。1975年接受治疗的所有患者均接受传统(辅助或控制)机械通气。1976年,77例患者(57%)采用IMV治疗,58例患者(43%)采用传统机械通气治疗。根据年龄、性别、种族、肺部疾病史、吸烟史、诊断、科室和治疗地点,将1976年采用IMV治疗的65例患者与1975年采用传统通气治疗的患者进行匹配。采用IMV治疗的患者平均使用呼吸机的时间为145小时,而匹配的对照组患者为142小时。IMV组患者的住院时间为36天,对照组患者为30天。这些时间段没有显著差异,表明IMV并没有缩短呼吸机管理的时间。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验