Lujan H J, Dries D J, Gamelli R L
Burn and Shock Trauma Institute, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL 60153, USA.
J Burn Care Rehabil. 1995 May-Jun;16(3 Pt 1):258-61. doi: 10.1097/00004630-199505000-00007.
The objective of this study was to demonstrate that bedside burn intensive care unit tracheostomy is a safe and cost-effective procedure and has advantages over operating room tracheostomy. The charts of all patients who underwent tracheostomies in the burn unit between January 1990 and September 1993 were reviewed retrospectively. All tracheostomies were performed by residents in their second to fourth postgraduate years. The identical operating room technique was used for all bedside procedures including complete instrument tray, electrocautery, and adequate lighting. Standard tracheostomies were routinely performed at the bedside instead of the operating room in an attempt to deal with an increasing number of critically ill patients with burns requiring operating room surgical procedures. No patient-specific criteria were used to determine whether bedside or operating room tracheostomy would be performed. Charges for bedside intensive care unit and operating room tracheostomy were compared. Group t test and chi-square analysis were used with significance set at p < 0.05. Forty-three tracheostomies were performed in the 45-month period reviewed. Twenty-five tracheostomies performed in the operating room were compared with the 18 tracheostomies performed at the bedside in the burn intensive care unit. No statistical difference existed in age, sex, mean total body surface area percent burned, mean inspired oxygen, mean positive end expiratory pressure, mean pretracheostomy intubated days, presence of inhalation injury, or complication rate between groups. The average combined cost for operating room and anesthesia was $1740 per tracheostomy performed in the operating room. No charge was given to the patient for a bedside tracheostomy apart from the surgeon's fee and tracheostomy tube.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
本研究的目的是证明床边烧伤重症监护病房气管切开术是一种安全且具有成本效益的手术,并且比手术室气管切开术更具优势。回顾性分析了1990年1月至1993年9月间在烧伤科接受气管切开术的所有患者的病历。所有气管切开术均由二至四年级的住院医师完成。所有床边手术均采用相同的手术室技术,包括完整的器械托盘、电灼术和充足的照明。为了应对越来越多需要手术室手术的重症烧伤患者,常规在床边而非手术室进行标准气管切开术。未使用特定患者标准来决定是在床边还是手术室进行气管切开术。比较了床边重症监护病房气管切开术和手术室气管切开术的费用。采用t检验和卡方分析,显著性水平设定为p<0.05。在回顾的45个月期间共进行了43例气管切开术。将在手术室进行的25例气管切开术与在烧伤重症监护病房床边进行的18例气管切开术进行比较。两组在年龄、性别、平均总体表面积烧伤百分比、平均吸入氧、平均呼气末正压、气管切开术前平均插管天数、是否存在吸入性损伤或并发症发生率方面均无统计学差异。在手术室进行的每例气管切开术,手术室和麻醉的平均总费用为1740美元。床边气管切开术除外科医生费用和气管切开管外,患者无需支付其他费用。(摘要截短为250字)