{"title":"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。","authors":"Thitinuch Ruenhunsa, Panyaporn Chinsatit, Saranyoo Nonphiaraj, Siwalai Sucher, Sarinya Chanthawong, Wilawan Somdee, Peerapong Sangsungnern","doi":"10.6859/aja.202306_61(2).0005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>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).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Oxygen supplementation via NC and via FM with a reservoir bag were equally effective in preventing postoperative hypoxemia after GA.</p>","PeriodicalId":8482,"journal":{"name":"Asian journal of anesthesiology","volume":"61 2","pages":"81-88"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"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, Siwalai Sucher, Sarinya Chanthawong, Wilawan Somdee, Peerapong Sangsungnern\",\"doi\":\"10.6859/aja.202306_61(2).0005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>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).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Oxygen supplementation via NC and via FM with a reservoir bag were equally effective in preventing postoperative hypoxemia after GA.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8482,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asian journal of anesthesiology\",\"volume\":\"61 2\",\"pages\":\"81-88\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"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.202306_61(2).0005\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian journal of anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6859/aja.202306_61(2).0005","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
摘要
背景:通过带储氧袋的面罩(FM)给高浓度氧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系统并发症。低浓度通过鼻插管(NC)可能同样有效地预防术后低氧血症。本研究旨在比较全麻(GA)患者外周血氧饱和度(SpO_2)通过NC和FM与储氧袋输送。方法:84例GA患者在麻醉后护理单位(PACU)随机接受NC供氧(NC组,n = 42)或带储液袋FM (FM组,n = 42) 30分钟。根据SpO_2值、不良事件和患者满意度(使用100毫米视觉模拟量表测量)对所有患者进行评估。结果:PACU 30 min SpO_2变化组间总差异为-0.004(95%可信区间:-0.015 ~ 0.008;P = 0.527)。NC组前5 min SpO_2较低,但差异无统计学意义。两组均未发生去饱和,两组之间的不良事件也没有观察到差异。患者满意度得分相似(P = 0.612)。结论:经NC和经FM加储氧袋补氧对预防GA术后低氧血症同样有效。
Comparison of the Effectiveness of Nasal Cannula Versus Face Mask With Reservoir Bag in Postoperative Patients Undergoing General Anesthesia: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.
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.
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.