Comparison of the Effectiveness of Nasal Cannula Versus Face Mask With Reservoir Bag in Postoperative Patients Undergoing General Anesthesia: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.

Q3 Medicine
Thitinuch Ruenhunsa, Panyaporn Chinsatit, Saranyoo Nonphiaraj, S. Sucher, Sarinya Chanthawong, Wilawan Somdee, Peerapong Sangsungnern
{"title":"Comparison of the Effectiveness of Nasal Cannula Versus Face Mask With Reservoir Bag in Postoperative Patients Undergoing General Anesthesia: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Thitinuch Ruenhunsa, Panyaporn Chinsatit, Saranyoo Nonphiaraj, S. Sucher, Sarinya Chanthawong, Wilawan Somdee, Peerapong Sangsungnern","doi":"10.6859/aja.202307/PP.0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\nHigh-concentration oxygen delivery via a face mask (FM) with a reservoir bag is a common practice to prevent postoperative hypoxemia; however, it may also lead to atelectasis and other respiratory complications. Lower concentrations delivered via nasal cannula (NC) may be equally effective in preventing postoperative hypoxemia. The present study aimed to compare peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO_2) delivered via NC versus FM with a reservoir bag in patients who have undergone general anesthesia (GA).\n\n\nMETHODS\nEighty-four patients scheduled for GA were randomized to receive either oxygen via NC (NC group, n = 42) or FM with a reservoir bag (FM group, n = 42) for 30 minutes after GA at a postanesthesia care unit (PACU). All patients were assessed based on SpO_2 value, adverse events, and patient satisfaction (measured using a 100-mm visual analog scale).\n\n\nRESULTS\nThe overall difference between groups in the change of SpO_2 over 30 minutes at the PACU was -0.004 (95% confidence interval, -0.015 to 0.008; P = 0.527). SpO_2 during the first five minutes was lower in NC group, but the difference was not statistically significant. No desaturation occurred in either group, and there was no observed difference between groups in terms of adverse events. Patient satisfaction scores were also similar (P = 0.612).\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nOxygen supplementation via NC and via FM with a reservoir bag were equally effective in preventing postoperative hypoxemia after GA.","PeriodicalId":8482,"journal":{"name":"Asian journal of anesthesiology","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian journal of anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6859/aja.202307/PP.0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BACKGROUND High-concentration oxygen delivery via a face mask (FM) with a reservoir bag is a common practice to prevent postoperative hypoxemia; however, it may also lead to atelectasis and other respiratory complications. Lower concentrations delivered via nasal cannula (NC) may be equally effective in preventing postoperative hypoxemia. The present study aimed to compare peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO_2) delivered via NC versus FM with a reservoir bag in patients who have undergone general anesthesia (GA). METHODS Eighty-four patients scheduled for GA were randomized to receive either oxygen via NC (NC group, n = 42) or FM with a reservoir bag (FM group, n = 42) for 30 minutes after GA at a postanesthesia care unit (PACU). All patients were assessed based on SpO_2 value, adverse events, and patient satisfaction (measured using a 100-mm visual analog scale). RESULTS The overall difference between groups in the change of SpO_2 over 30 minutes at the PACU was -0.004 (95% confidence interval, -0.015 to 0.008; P = 0.527). SpO_2 during the first five minutes was lower in NC group, but the difference was not statistically significant. No desaturation occurred in either group, and there was no observed difference between groups in terms of adverse events. Patient satisfaction scores were also similar (P = 0.612). CONCLUSIONS Oxygen supplementation via NC and via FM with a reservoir bag were equally effective in preventing postoperative hypoxemia after GA.
一项前瞻性随机对照试验:鼻插管与面罩加储液袋在全麻术后患者中的效果比较。
背景通过带储液袋的面罩(FM)输送高浓度氧气是预防术后低氧血症的常见做法;然而,它也可能导致肺不张和其他呼吸道并发症。通过鼻插管(NC)输送的较低浓度在预防术后低氧血症方面可能同样有效。本研究旨在比较全身麻醉(GA)患者通过NC和FM输送的外周血氧饱和度(SpO_2)。方法将4名计划接受GA的患者随机分为两组:NC组(n=42)或FM组(n=43),在麻醉后监护室(PACU)接受GA后30分钟的NC输送氧气。所有患者均根据SpO_2值、不良事件和患者满意度(使用100mm视觉模拟量表测量)进行评估。结果两组在PACU 30分钟内SpO_2变化的总体差异为-0.004(95%置信区间,-0.015-0.008;P=0.527)。NC组前5分钟SpO_2较低,但差异无统计学意义。两组均未出现去饱和现象,两组间不良事件也无明显差异。患者满意度评分也相似(P=0.612)。结论通过NC和带储液袋的FM补充氧气在预防GA术后低氧血症方面同样有效。
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
Asian journal of anesthesiology
Asian journal of anesthesiology Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: Asian Journal of Anesthesiology (AJA), launched in 1962, is the official and peer-reviewed publication of the Taiwan Society of Anaesthesiologists. It is published quarterly (March/June/September/December) by Airiti and indexed in EMBASE, Medline, Scopus, ScienceDirect, SIIC Data Bases. AJA accepts submissions from around the world. AJA is the premier open access journal in the field of anaesthesia and its related disciplines of critical care and pain in Asia. The number of Chinese anaesthesiologists has reached more than 60,000 and is still growing. The journal aims to disseminate anaesthesiology research and services for the Chinese community and is now the main anaesthesiology journal for Chinese societies located in Taiwan, Mainland China, Hong Kong and Singapore. AJAcaters to clinicians of all relevant specialties and biomedical scientists working in the areas of anesthesia, critical care medicine and pain management, as well as other related fields (pharmacology, pathology molecular biology, etc). AJA''s editorial team is composed of local and regional experts in the field as well as many leading international experts. Article types accepted include review articles, research papers, short communication, correspondence and images.
×
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