Comparison of nasal trauma associated with nasopharyngeal airway applied by nurses and experienced anesthesiologists.

Changgeng yi xue za zhi Pub Date : 1999-12-01
C H Chung, C W Sum, H L Li, K S Cheng, P C Tan
{"title":"Comparison of nasal trauma associated with nasopharyngeal airway applied by nurses and experienced anesthesiologists.","authors":"C H Chung,&nbsp;C W Sum,&nbsp;H L Li,&nbsp;K S Cheng,&nbsp;P C Tan","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Insertion of a nasopharyngeal airway by nurses is considered to be invasive. We compared the incidence and severity of nasal injury associated with nasopharyngeal airway insertion by trained nurses to those by anesthesiologists to determine the safety of inserting a nasopharyngeal airway by nurses in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>One hundred and sixteen male and 96 female patients scheduled for general anesthesia were included in the study. The male and female patients were randomly assigned to two groups respectively. Anesthesia was induced with sodium thiopental and fentanyl intravenously. The patients were then ventilated with a bag-valve-mask by trained nurses or anesthesiologists. In the unsuccessfully ventilated patients, nasopharyngeal airways were inserted to facilitate subsequent ventilation. The nasopharyngeal airway, oropharynx, and nostrils were then examined. The incidence and severity of nasal trauma induced by trained nurses or by anesthesiologists were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study revealed that nasopharyngeal airways applied by trained nurses did not induce more severe nasal trauma than those by anesthesiologists.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We suggest that nasopharyngeal airways may be applied safely by trained nurses in CPR.</p>","PeriodicalId":77066,"journal":{"name":"Changgeng yi xue za zhi","volume":"22 4","pages":"593-7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Changgeng yi xue za zhi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Insertion of a nasopharyngeal airway by nurses is considered to be invasive. We compared the incidence and severity of nasal injury associated with nasopharyngeal airway insertion by trained nurses to those by anesthesiologists to determine the safety of inserting a nasopharyngeal airway by nurses in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR).

Methods: One hundred and sixteen male and 96 female patients scheduled for general anesthesia were included in the study. The male and female patients were randomly assigned to two groups respectively. Anesthesia was induced with sodium thiopental and fentanyl intravenously. The patients were then ventilated with a bag-valve-mask by trained nurses or anesthesiologists. In the unsuccessfully ventilated patients, nasopharyngeal airways were inserted to facilitate subsequent ventilation. The nasopharyngeal airway, oropharynx, and nostrils were then examined. The incidence and severity of nasal trauma induced by trained nurses or by anesthesiologists were compared.

Results: The study revealed that nasopharyngeal airways applied by trained nurses did not induce more severe nasal trauma than those by anesthesiologists.

Conclusion: We suggest that nasopharyngeal airways may be applied safely by trained nurses in CPR.

护士与经验麻醉师应用鼻咽气道鼻外伤的比较。
背景:护士插入鼻咽气道被认为是侵入性的。我们比较了训练有素的护士与麻醉师插入鼻咽气道相关鼻损伤的发生率和严重程度,以确定护士在心肺复苏(CPR)中插入鼻咽气道的安全性。方法:选取全麻患者116例,女性96例。将男性和女性患者随机分为两组。静脉注射硫喷妥钠和芬太尼诱导麻醉。然后由训练有素的护士或麻醉师给患者戴上气囊面罩进行通气。在通气不成功的患者中,插入鼻咽气道以方便后续通气。然后检查鼻咽气道、口咽和鼻孔。比较训练有素的护士和麻醉师引起的鼻外伤的发生率和严重程度。结果:经过培训的护士使用鼻咽部气道并不比麻醉师使用更严重。结论:经培训的护士可在心肺复苏术中安全应用鼻咽部气道。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信