Objective:To investigate the wet and not wet the low flow (<4L/min) nasal catheter oxygen in patients with respiratory symptoms had no change. Whether to wet. Methods: according to the occupancy time were divided into, the continuous low flow oxygen inhalation in >12h patients were divided into routine humidification oxygen inhaling group (humidity group) and without humidification oxygen inhaling group (not wet group); the continuous low flow nasal catheter oxygen time of >24h patients, its routine humidification oxygen absorption and without humidification oxygen. The respiratory response of patients were compared. Results: the nose and throat drying are only symptoms appear as in this study. Observation of 60 cases of humidification group and 26 cases of L, 2 cases of patients with nasal and throat dry, dry in 34 cases, 4 cases of patients with nasal and throat dry, no significant dif erences between the 2 groups (P>O.05); method of 25 was observed in 2 patients, in which 1 cases of oxygen humidification process with nose and throat the dry, to not wet oxygen without obvious symptoms aggravated; without humidification oxygen process with nose and throat dry l cases, to wet oxygen without obvious symptoms ease, no statistical y significant ef ect of two dif erent ways of oxygen inhalation on patients with respiratory tract dif erences (P>0.05). Conclusion:low flow nasal catheter oxygen without wet. it can reduce the workload of nurses, improve the satisfaction of patients.%目的：探讨常规湿化与未湿化中低流量(<4L/min)鼻导管吸氧患者呼吸道症状有无改变、是否需要湿化。方法按患者入住时间分为，①持续中低流量鼻导管吸氧>12h的患者分为常规湿化吸氧组(湿化组)与未经湿化吸氧组(未湿化组)；②持续中低流量鼻导管吸氧时间>24h的患者，分为自身常规湿化吸氧与未经湿化吸氧。观察两组患者的呼吸道反应情况。结果患者仅出现鼻咽喉部干燥感。方法一中观察组中行湿化的患者26例，其中出现鼻咽喉部干燥的患者2例，干燥者34例，出现鼻咽喉部干燥的患者4例，两组患者比较差异无统计学意义(P>0．05)；方法二中观察组患者25例，其中湿化吸氧时出现鼻咽喉部干燥的患者1例，将其换为未湿化吸氧后，其临床症状未见明显加重；在未经湿化吸氧过程中出现鼻咽喉部干燥的患者 l例，将其换成湿化吸氧后症状未见明显减轻，两种不同的吸氧方式对患者呼吸道的影响差异无统计学意(P>0．05)。结论中低流量鼻导管吸氧无需常规湿化。可以降低护理人员的工作量，提高患者满意度。
展开▼
