传统胸部物理治疗和呼气流量增加技术对机械通气早产新生儿呼吸参数、心率和疼痛的短期影响:随机对照试验

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Jacqueline Carla de Macedo, Clarice Rosa Olivo, Viviani Barnabé, Eduardo Dati Dias, Íbis Ariana Peña de Moraes, Iolanda de Fátima Lopes Calvo Tibério, Celso Ricardo Fernandes de Carvalho, Beatriz Mangueira Saraiva-Romanholo
{"title":"传统胸部物理治疗和呼气流量增加技术对机械通气早产新生儿呼吸参数、心率和疼痛的短期影响:随机对照试验","authors":"Jacqueline Carla de Macedo, Clarice Rosa Olivo, Viviani Barnabé, Eduardo Dati Dias, Íbis Ariana Peña de Moraes, Iolanda de Fátima Lopes Calvo Tibério, Celso Ricardo Fernandes de Carvalho, Beatriz Mangueira Saraiva-Romanholo","doi":"10.3390/healthcare12232408","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background/Objectives</b>: Prematurity is a leading cause of infant mortality and mechanical ventilation increases respiratory complication risk. The effects of secretion removal techniques in premature infants remain a topic of ongoing debate. The aim of the study is to compare two secretion removal techniques in premature infants on mechanical ventilation; <b>Methods</b>: The participants were randomized into conventional chest physiotherapy (CPT; <i>n</i> = 22) or expiratory flow increase technique (EFIT; <i>n</i> = 21) groups. Each participant completed four sessions on consecutive days with a minimum of one and a maximum of two sessions per day. We assessed peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO<sub>2</sub>), heart (HR) and respiratory rates (RR), tidal volume (VT), and pain levels at specific time points: before the intervention, immediately after the intervention, 5 min after the intervention, and 10 min after the intervention. The partial Eta squared (ŋ<sub>p</sub><sup>2</sup>) was reported to measure the effect size; <b>Results</b>: HR and RR increased post-intervention in both groups (<i>p</i> < 0.001; HR ŋ<sub>p</sub><sup>2</sup> = 0.51; RR ŋ<sub>p</sub><sup>2</sup> = 0.38); post hoc comparisons showed EFIT group decreased RR from the first to last session (<i>p</i> = 0.045). Both groups exhibited increased VT and SpO<sub>2</sub> in all sessions (<i>p</i> < 0.001; VT ŋ<sub>p</sub><sup>2</sup> = 0.40; SpO<sub>2</sub> ŋ<sub>p</sub><sup>2</sup> = 0.50). The EFIT group had higher SpO<sub>2</sub> values (<i>p</i> = 0.013; ŋ<sub>p</sub><sup>2</sup> = 0.15) and lower pain scores (<i>p</i> < 0.001; ŋ<sub>p</sub><sup>2</sup> = 0.46) post-intervention compared to CPT; <b>Conclusions</b>: CPT and EFIT resulted in similar effects on short-term respiratory parameters and heart rate; however, EFIT had advantages, including lower RR, higher SpO<sub>2</sub>, and reduced pain, suggesting it may be a more effective, comfortable neonatal respiratory treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":12977,"journal":{"name":"Healthcare","volume":"12 23","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Short-Term Effects of Conventional Chest Physiotherapy and Expiratory Flow Increase Technique on Respiratory Parameters, Heart Rate, and Pain in Mechanically Ventilated Premature Neonates: A Randomized Controlled Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Jacqueline Carla de Macedo, Clarice Rosa Olivo, Viviani Barnabé, Eduardo Dati Dias, Íbis Ariana Peña de Moraes, Iolanda de Fátima Lopes Calvo Tibério, Celso Ricardo Fernandes de Carvalho, Beatriz Mangueira Saraiva-Romanholo\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/healthcare12232408\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background/Objectives</b>: Prematurity is a leading cause of infant mortality and mechanical ventilation increases respiratory complication risk. The effects of secretion removal techniques in premature infants remain a topic of ongoing debate. The aim of the study is to compare two secretion removal techniques in premature infants on mechanical ventilation; <b>Methods</b>: The participants were randomized into conventional chest physiotherapy (CPT; <i>n</i> = 22) or expiratory flow increase technique (EFIT; <i>n</i> = 21) groups. Each participant completed four sessions on consecutive days with a minimum of one and a maximum of two sessions per day. We assessed peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO<sub>2</sub>), heart (HR) and respiratory rates (RR), tidal volume (VT), and pain levels at specific time points: before the intervention, immediately after the intervention, 5 min after the intervention, and 10 min after the intervention. The partial Eta squared (ŋ<sub>p</sub><sup>2</sup>) was reported to measure the effect size; <b>Results</b>: HR and RR increased post-intervention in both groups (<i>p</i> < 0.001; HR ŋ<sub>p</sub><sup>2</sup> = 0.51; RR ŋ<sub>p</sub><sup>2</sup> = 0.38); post hoc comparisons showed EFIT group decreased RR from the first to last session (<i>p</i> = 0.045). Both groups exhibited increased VT and SpO<sub>2</sub> in all sessions (<i>p</i> < 0.001; VT ŋ<sub>p</sub><sup>2</sup> = 0.40; SpO<sub>2</sub> ŋ<sub>p</sub><sup>2</sup> = 0.50). The EFIT group had higher SpO<sub>2</sub> values (<i>p</i> = 0.013; ŋ<sub>p</sub><sup>2</sup> = 0.15) and lower pain scores (<i>p</i> < 0.001; ŋ<sub>p</sub><sup>2</sup> = 0.46) post-intervention compared to CPT; <b>Conclusions</b>: CPT and EFIT resulted in similar effects on short-term respiratory parameters and heart rate; however, EFIT had advantages, including lower RR, higher SpO<sub>2</sub>, and reduced pain, suggesting it may be a more effective, comfortable neonatal respiratory treatment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12977,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Healthcare\",\"volume\":\"12 23\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Healthcare\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare12232408\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare12232408","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景/目的:早产是婴儿死亡的主要原因之一,而机械通气会增加呼吸系统并发症的风险。早产儿分泌物清除技术的效果仍是一个争论不休的话题。本研究旨在比较两种早产儿机械通气中分泌物清除技术的效果:将参与者随机分为传统胸部物理治疗组(CPT;n = 22)和呼气流量增加技术组(EFIT;n = 21)。每位参与者连续四天完成四个疗程,每天最少一个疗程,最多两个疗程。我们在特定的时间点评估了外周血氧饱和度 (SpO2)、心率 (HR) 和呼吸频率 (RR)、潮气量 (VT) 以及疼痛程度:干预前、干预后立即、干预后 5 分钟和干预后 10 分钟。报告了部分 Eta 平方(ŋp2),以衡量效应大小;结果:干预后心率和心率增加:两组干预后心率和心率均增加(p < 0.001;心率 ŋp2 = 0.51;心率 ŋp2 = 0.38);事后比较显示,EFIT 组从第一节课到最后一节课的心率均下降(p = 0.045)。两组在所有疗程中的 VT 和 SpO2 均有所增加(p < 0.001;VT ŋp2 = 0.40;SpO2 ŋp2 = 0.50)。与 CPT 相比,EFIT 组干预后的 SpO2 值更高(p = 0.013;ŋp2 = 0.15),疼痛评分更低(p < 0.001;ŋp2 = 0.46);结论:CPT和EFIT对短期呼吸参数和心率的影响相似;但EFIT具有优势,包括更低的RR、更高的SpO2和更少的疼痛,表明它可能是一种更有效、更舒适的新生儿呼吸治疗方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Short-Term Effects of Conventional Chest Physiotherapy and Expiratory Flow Increase Technique on Respiratory Parameters, Heart Rate, and Pain in Mechanically Ventilated Premature Neonates: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background/Objectives: Prematurity is a leading cause of infant mortality and mechanical ventilation increases respiratory complication risk. The effects of secretion removal techniques in premature infants remain a topic of ongoing debate. The aim of the study is to compare two secretion removal techniques in premature infants on mechanical ventilation; Methods: The participants were randomized into conventional chest physiotherapy (CPT; n = 22) or expiratory flow increase technique (EFIT; n = 21) groups. Each participant completed four sessions on consecutive days with a minimum of one and a maximum of two sessions per day. We assessed peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2), heart (HR) and respiratory rates (RR), tidal volume (VT), and pain levels at specific time points: before the intervention, immediately after the intervention, 5 min after the intervention, and 10 min after the intervention. The partial Eta squared (ŋp2) was reported to measure the effect size; Results: HR and RR increased post-intervention in both groups (p < 0.001; HR ŋp2 = 0.51; RR ŋp2 = 0.38); post hoc comparisons showed EFIT group decreased RR from the first to last session (p = 0.045). Both groups exhibited increased VT and SpO2 in all sessions (p < 0.001; VT ŋp2 = 0.40; SpO2 ŋp2 = 0.50). The EFIT group had higher SpO2 values (p = 0.013; ŋp2 = 0.15) and lower pain scores (p < 0.001; ŋp2 = 0.46) post-intervention compared to CPT; Conclusions: CPT and EFIT resulted in similar effects on short-term respiratory parameters and heart rate; however, EFIT had advantages, including lower RR, higher SpO2, and reduced pain, suggesting it may be a more effective, comfortable neonatal respiratory treatment.

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
Healthcare
Healthcare Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
0
审稿时长
47 days
期刊介绍: Healthcare (ISSN 2227-9032) is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal (free for readers), which publishes original theoretical and empirical work in the interdisciplinary area of all aspects of medicine and health care research. Healthcare publishes Original Research Articles, Reviews, Case Reports, Research Notes and Short Communications. We encourage researchers to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible. For theoretical papers, full details of proofs must be provided so that the results can be checked; for experimental papers, full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced. Additionally, electronic files or software regarding the full details of the calculations, experimental procedure, etc., can be deposited along with the publication as “Supplementary Material”.
×
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