重症监护病房患者意外气管插管移位:三种不同气管插管固定带的随机比较。

IF 1.5 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Md Parwaj H Ansari, Nidhi Arun, Anand Dev, Ankita Verma
{"title":"重症监护病房患者意外气管插管移位:三种不同气管插管固定带的随机比较。","authors":"Md Parwaj H Ansari, Nidhi Arun, Anand Dev, Ankita Verma","doi":"10.5005/jp-journals-10071-24960","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>Several materials and techniques are used for securing the endotracheal tube (ETT). This randomized, controlled trial was conducted to compare three different types of fixation tapes: (1) Cloth-based, nonadhesive, nonelastic tape (gauze tape); (2) Silk-based, adhesive, nonelastic tape (Durapore™); and (3) Cloth-based, adhesive, elastic tape (Dynaplast™), with the primary objective to compare the incidence of displacement (≥1 cm) of ETT in intensive care unit (ICU) patients.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>This randomized prospective comparative trial was conducted on 150 ICU patients, of either gender between 16 and 80 years of age requiring endotracheal intubations. All patients were randomly allocated into groups A, B, and C. Endotracheal tube was secured with gauze tape, Durapore™, and Dynaplast™ in groups A, B, and C, respectively, with uniform technique. The final insertion depth of the ETT was marked, and displacement ≥ 1 cm was recorded. Ease of fixation, time taken, need for assistance, adhesive quality, and skin changes were also recorded and compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Endotracheal tube displacement ≥ 1 cm over 24 hours was recorded in 58.7, 35.4, and 29.8% of patients in tape gauze, Durapore™, and Dynaplast™, respectively (<i>χ</i> <sup>2</sup> = 11.372, <i>p</i> = 0.011). Durapore™ and Dynaplast™ were quicker and easier to apply, but with a high incidence of skin complications.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although no single material emerged superior in all aspects, our findings highlight the trade-offs between ease of application, risk of skin complications, and fixation security. The ideal fixation material may vary depending on patient characteristics, clinical context, and institutional resources.</p><p><strong>How to cite this article: </strong>Md Ansari PH, Arun N, Dev A, Verma A. Accidental Endotracheal Tube Displacement in Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Randomized Comparison of Three Different Endotracheal Tube-securing Tapes. Indian J Crit Care Med 2025;29(5):418-423.</p>","PeriodicalId":47664,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Critical Care Medicine","volume":"29 5","pages":"418-423"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12101974/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Accidental Endotracheal Tube Displacement in Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Randomized Comparison of Three Different Endotracheal Tube-securing Tapes.\",\"authors\":\"Md Parwaj H Ansari, Nidhi Arun, Anand Dev, Ankita Verma\",\"doi\":\"10.5005/jp-journals-10071-24960\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>Several materials and techniques are used for securing the endotracheal tube (ETT). This randomized, controlled trial was conducted to compare three different types of fixation tapes: (1) Cloth-based, nonadhesive, nonelastic tape (gauze tape); (2) Silk-based, adhesive, nonelastic tape (Durapore™); and (3) Cloth-based, adhesive, elastic tape (Dynaplast™), with the primary objective to compare the incidence of displacement (≥1 cm) of ETT in intensive care unit (ICU) patients.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>This randomized prospective comparative trial was conducted on 150 ICU patients, of either gender between 16 and 80 years of age requiring endotracheal intubations. All patients were randomly allocated into groups A, B, and C. Endotracheal tube was secured with gauze tape, Durapore™, and Dynaplast™ in groups A, B, and C, respectively, with uniform technique. The final insertion depth of the ETT was marked, and displacement ≥ 1 cm was recorded. Ease of fixation, time taken, need for assistance, adhesive quality, and skin changes were also recorded and compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Endotracheal tube displacement ≥ 1 cm over 24 hours was recorded in 58.7, 35.4, and 29.8% of patients in tape gauze, Durapore™, and Dynaplast™, respectively (<i>χ</i> <sup>2</sup> = 11.372, <i>p</i> = 0.011). Durapore™ and Dynaplast™ were quicker and easier to apply, but with a high incidence of skin complications.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although no single material emerged superior in all aspects, our findings highlight the trade-offs between ease of application, risk of skin complications, and fixation security. The ideal fixation material may vary depending on patient characteristics, clinical context, and institutional resources.</p><p><strong>How to cite this article: </strong>Md Ansari PH, Arun N, Dev A, Verma A. Accidental Endotracheal Tube Displacement in Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Randomized Comparison of Three Different Endotracheal Tube-securing Tapes. Indian J Crit Care Med 2025;29(5):418-423.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47664,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indian Journal of Critical Care Medicine\",\"volume\":\"29 5\",\"pages\":\"418-423\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12101974/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indian Journal of Critical Care Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10071-24960\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/5/8 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Critical Care Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10071-24960","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:用于固定气管内插管的材料和技术多种多样。本随机对照试验比较了三种不同类型的固定胶带:(1)布基、非粘接、非弹性胶带(纱布胶带);(2)丝基无弹性胶粘带(Durapore™);(3)布基粘胶弹性胶带(Dynaplast™),主要目的是比较重症监护病房(ICU)患者ETT移位(≥1cm)的发生率。患者和方法:这项随机前瞻性比较试验对150例ICU患者进行了研究,患者不分性别,年龄在16至80岁之间,需要气管插管。所有患者随机分为A、B、C组。A、B、C组气管插管分别用纱布胶带、Durapore™、Dynaplast™固定,技术统一。标记ETT的最终插入深度,并记录位移≥1 cm。同时记录并比较固定难易程度、所需时间、需要帮助、粘接剂质量和皮肤变化。结果:胶带纱布、Durapore™和Dynaplast™分别有58.7%、35.4%和29.8%的患者在24小时内气管插管移位≥1 cm (χ 2 = 11.372, p = 0.011)。Durapore™和Dynaplast™更快、更容易应用,但皮肤并发症发生率高。结论:虽然没有一种材料在所有方面都具有优势,但我们的研究结果强调了在易于应用,皮肤并发症风险和固定安全性之间的权衡。理想的固定材料可能因患者特征、临床背景和机构资源而异。Md Ansari PH, Arun N, Dev A, Verma A.重症监护病房患者意外气管插管移位:三种不同气管插管固定带的随机比较。中华检验医学杂志,2015;29(5):418-423。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Accidental Endotracheal Tube Displacement in Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Randomized Comparison of Three Different Endotracheal Tube-securing Tapes.

Accidental Endotracheal Tube Displacement in Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Randomized Comparison of Three Different Endotracheal Tube-securing Tapes.

Accidental Endotracheal Tube Displacement in Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Randomized Comparison of Three Different Endotracheal Tube-securing Tapes.

Accidental Endotracheal Tube Displacement in Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Randomized Comparison of Three Different Endotracheal Tube-securing Tapes.

Background and aims: Several materials and techniques are used for securing the endotracheal tube (ETT). This randomized, controlled trial was conducted to compare three different types of fixation tapes: (1) Cloth-based, nonadhesive, nonelastic tape (gauze tape); (2) Silk-based, adhesive, nonelastic tape (Durapore™); and (3) Cloth-based, adhesive, elastic tape (Dynaplast™), with the primary objective to compare the incidence of displacement (≥1 cm) of ETT in intensive care unit (ICU) patients.

Patients and methods: This randomized prospective comparative trial was conducted on 150 ICU patients, of either gender between 16 and 80 years of age requiring endotracheal intubations. All patients were randomly allocated into groups A, B, and C. Endotracheal tube was secured with gauze tape, Durapore™, and Dynaplast™ in groups A, B, and C, respectively, with uniform technique. The final insertion depth of the ETT was marked, and displacement ≥ 1 cm was recorded. Ease of fixation, time taken, need for assistance, adhesive quality, and skin changes were also recorded and compared.

Results: Endotracheal tube displacement ≥ 1 cm over 24 hours was recorded in 58.7, 35.4, and 29.8% of patients in tape gauze, Durapore™, and Dynaplast™, respectively (χ 2 = 11.372, p = 0.011). Durapore™ and Dynaplast™ were quicker and easier to apply, but with a high incidence of skin complications.

Conclusion: Although no single material emerged superior in all aspects, our findings highlight the trade-offs between ease of application, risk of skin complications, and fixation security. The ideal fixation material may vary depending on patient characteristics, clinical context, and institutional resources.

How to cite this article: Md Ansari PH, Arun N, Dev A, Verma A. Accidental Endotracheal Tube Displacement in Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Randomized Comparison of Three Different Endotracheal Tube-securing Tapes. Indian J Crit Care Med 2025;29(5):418-423.

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
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
10.00%
发文量
299
期刊介绍: Indian Journal of Critical Care Medicine (ISSN 0972-5229) is specialty periodical published under the auspices of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine. Journal encourages research, education and dissemination of knowledge in the fields of critical and emergency medicine.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信