[德国南部救援服务的急救药物雾化]。

4区 医学 Q3 Medicine
M Otto, Y Kropp, T Viergutz, M Thiel, C Tsagogiorgas
{"title":"[德国南部救援服务的急救药物雾化]。","authors":"M Otto,&nbsp;Y Kropp,&nbsp;T Viergutz,&nbsp;M Thiel,&nbsp;C Tsagogiorgas","doi":"10.1007/s00101-021-00992-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In German emergency rescue services, inhalation treatment is routinely carried out by qualified health personnel. Standard operating procedures (SOP) for nebulization are neither uniform throughout Germany nor available in all federal states. Standardized recommendations with respect to which nebulizer type should be used are missing. The aerosol output as well as the drug deposition rates of jet and mesh nebulizers, however, differ considerably. Mesh devices can achieve a threefold higher lung deposition. Their use in emergency departments has also been shown to be associated with a better patient outcome when compared to jet nebulizers.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This survey was designed to evaluate the type of nebulizer used in the south German rescue services. Special attention was paid to the influence of existing SOP on the decision to perform nebulization during emergency treatment.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>A total of 4800 emergency paramedics working in Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria and Rhineland-Palatinate received a questionnaire with a total of 17 questions on the implementation of drug nebulization in the daily practice.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Despite the existence of more efficient nebulizer types, the jet nebulizer was by far the most frequently used nebulizer in the south German rescue services. The deposition rates of both the jet and mesh nebulizers were considerably overestimated by most respondents; however, 77.5% of all respondents could not give any information about the deposition rates of the mesh nebulizer. Only two thirds of all respondents carried out nebulization treatment on the basis of SOP. The implementation of SOP, however, was pivotal to the application of nebulization during emergencies. If SOP were in place,76.9% of the responders used aerosol treatment compared to 23.1% when there were none. The perceived safety when using nebulization during emergencies was also significantly higher (p = 0.013) when SOP were implemented.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The exclusive use of mesh nebulizers could standardize the treatment of emergency patients in the south German rescue services. The use of mesh devices might possibly improve patient outcomes, even if clinical studies are still lacking. Nebulizer treatment differs between the federal states. A comprehensive implementation of SOP for nebulization treatment might support this process and could increase the application frequency and the perceived safety of nebulization during emergencies. A better training of paramedic personnel could improve the knowledge of aerosols as a treatment option for emergency patients and help to classify the advantages and disadvantages of the different aerosol generators available.</p>","PeriodicalId":50796,"journal":{"name":"Anaesthesist","volume":"71 2","pages":"110-116"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s00101-021-00992-x","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Nebulization of emergency medications in the south German rescue service].\",\"authors\":\"M Otto,&nbsp;Y Kropp,&nbsp;T Viergutz,&nbsp;M Thiel,&nbsp;C Tsagogiorgas\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00101-021-00992-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In German emergency rescue services, inhalation treatment is routinely carried out by qualified health personnel. Standard operating procedures (SOP) for nebulization are neither uniform throughout Germany nor available in all federal states. Standardized recommendations with respect to which nebulizer type should be used are missing. The aerosol output as well as the drug deposition rates of jet and mesh nebulizers, however, differ considerably. Mesh devices can achieve a threefold higher lung deposition. Their use in emergency departments has also been shown to be associated with a better patient outcome when compared to jet nebulizers.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This survey was designed to evaluate the type of nebulizer used in the south German rescue services. Special attention was paid to the influence of existing SOP on the decision to perform nebulization during emergency treatment.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>A total of 4800 emergency paramedics working in Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria and Rhineland-Palatinate received a questionnaire with a total of 17 questions on the implementation of drug nebulization in the daily practice.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Despite the existence of more efficient nebulizer types, the jet nebulizer was by far the most frequently used nebulizer in the south German rescue services. The deposition rates of both the jet and mesh nebulizers were considerably overestimated by most respondents; however, 77.5% of all respondents could not give any information about the deposition rates of the mesh nebulizer. Only two thirds of all respondents carried out nebulization treatment on the basis of SOP. The implementation of SOP, however, was pivotal to the application of nebulization during emergencies. If SOP were in place,76.9% of the responders used aerosol treatment compared to 23.1% when there were none. The perceived safety when using nebulization during emergencies was also significantly higher (p = 0.013) when SOP were implemented.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The exclusive use of mesh nebulizers could standardize the treatment of emergency patients in the south German rescue services. The use of mesh devices might possibly improve patient outcomes, even if clinical studies are still lacking. Nebulizer treatment differs between the federal states. A comprehensive implementation of SOP for nebulization treatment might support this process and could increase the application frequency and the perceived safety of nebulization during emergencies. A better training of paramedic personnel could improve the knowledge of aerosols as a treatment option for emergency patients and help to classify the advantages and disadvantages of the different aerosol generators available.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50796,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Anaesthesist\",\"volume\":\"71 2\",\"pages\":\"110-116\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s00101-021-00992-x\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Anaesthesist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00101-021-00992-x\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anaesthesist","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00101-021-00992-x","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

背景:在德国紧急救援服务中,吸入治疗通常由合格的卫生人员进行。雾化的标准操作程序(SOP)在整个德国既不统一,也不适用于所有联邦州。缺少关于应该使用哪种雾化器类型的标准化建议。然而,喷雾器和网状喷雾器的气溶胶输出以及药物沉积速率有很大不同。网状装置可以实现三倍以上的肺沉积。与喷射喷雾器相比,它们在急诊科的使用也被证明与更好的患者预后有关。目的:本调查旨在评估德国南部救援服务中使用的雾化器类型。特别注意的是,现有的SOP对决定在紧急治疗中进行雾化的影响。材料与方法:对在巴登-符腾堡州、巴伐利亚州和莱茵兰-普法尔茨州工作的4800名急救护理人员进行问卷调查,问卷共包含17个问题,内容涉及药物雾化在日常实践中的实施情况。结果:尽管存在更有效的雾化器类型,喷射雾化器是迄今为止最常用的雾化器在德国南部的救援服务。喷射式和网状雾化器的沉积速率被大多数受访者高估了;然而,77.5%的受访者不能提供任何关于网状雾化器沉积率的信息。只有三分之二的受访者根据SOP进行了雾化处理。然而,SOP的实施对紧急情况下雾化的应用至关重要。如果有SOP,76.9%的应答者使用气溶胶治疗,而没有SOP的应答者使用气溶胶治疗的比例为23.1%。当实施SOP时,紧急情况下使用喷雾的感知安全性也显著提高(p = 0.013)。结论:在德国南部地区的急救服务中,单独使用网状喷雾器可以规范急诊患者的治疗。使用网状装置可能会改善患者的预后,即使临床研究仍然缺乏。雾化器的处理方法在联邦各州之间有所不同。全面实施雾化处理SOP可以支持这一过程,并可以增加紧急情况下雾化的应用频率和安全性。对护理人员进行更好的培训,可以提高对作为急诊病人治疗选择的气溶胶的认识,并有助于对现有不同气溶胶发生器的优缺点进行分类。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

[Nebulization of emergency medications in the south German rescue service].

[Nebulization of emergency medications in the south German rescue service].

[Nebulization of emergency medications in the south German rescue service].

[Nebulization of emergency medications in the south German rescue service].

Background: In German emergency rescue services, inhalation treatment is routinely carried out by qualified health personnel. Standard operating procedures (SOP) for nebulization are neither uniform throughout Germany nor available in all federal states. Standardized recommendations with respect to which nebulizer type should be used are missing. The aerosol output as well as the drug deposition rates of jet and mesh nebulizers, however, differ considerably. Mesh devices can achieve a threefold higher lung deposition. Their use in emergency departments has also been shown to be associated with a better patient outcome when compared to jet nebulizers.

Objective: This survey was designed to evaluate the type of nebulizer used in the south German rescue services. Special attention was paid to the influence of existing SOP on the decision to perform nebulization during emergency treatment.

Material and methods: A total of 4800 emergency paramedics working in Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria and Rhineland-Palatinate received a questionnaire with a total of 17 questions on the implementation of drug nebulization in the daily practice.

Results: Despite the existence of more efficient nebulizer types, the jet nebulizer was by far the most frequently used nebulizer in the south German rescue services. The deposition rates of both the jet and mesh nebulizers were considerably overestimated by most respondents; however, 77.5% of all respondents could not give any information about the deposition rates of the mesh nebulizer. Only two thirds of all respondents carried out nebulization treatment on the basis of SOP. The implementation of SOP, however, was pivotal to the application of nebulization during emergencies. If SOP were in place,76.9% of the responders used aerosol treatment compared to 23.1% when there were none. The perceived safety when using nebulization during emergencies was also significantly higher (p = 0.013) when SOP were implemented.

Conclusion: The exclusive use of mesh nebulizers could standardize the treatment of emergency patients in the south German rescue services. The use of mesh devices might possibly improve patient outcomes, even if clinical studies are still lacking. Nebulizer treatment differs between the federal states. A comprehensive implementation of SOP for nebulization treatment might support this process and could increase the application frequency and the perceived safety of nebulization during emergencies. A better training of paramedic personnel could improve the knowledge of aerosols as a treatment option for emergency patients and help to classify the advantages and disadvantages of the different aerosol generators available.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Anaesthesist
Anaesthesist 医学-麻醉学
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
55
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Der Anaesthesist is an internationally recognized journal de­aling with all aspects of anaesthesia and intensive medicine up to pain therapy. Der Anaesthesist addresses all specialists and scientists particularly interested in anaesthesiology and it is neighbouring areas. Review articles provide an overview on selected topics reflecting the multidisciplinary environment including pharmacotherapy, intensive medicine, emergency medicine, regional anaesthetics, pain therapy and medical law. Freely submitted original papers allow the presentation of relevant clinical studies and serve the scientific exchange. Case reports feature interesting cases and aim at optimizing diagnostic and therapeutic strategies. Review articles under the rubric ''Continuing Medical Education'' present verified results of scientific research and their integration into daily practice.
×
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