摘要

目的 探讨无湿化中低流量吸氧在基层医疗机构患者中应用的可行性。方法 选取2022年~2023年进行中低流量给氧治疗的患者142人，随机分为湿化氧疗组70人和无湿化氧疗组72人，湿化氧疗组按照传统方法进行湿化吸氧，无湿化氧疗组患者吸氧时不湿化，在自然室温和湿度中吸氧。比较两组患者的吸氧后血氧饱和度、氧疗舒适度、吸氧消耗护理时间、医疗成本支出等。结果 湿化氧疗组和无湿化氧疗组的血氧饱和度和氧疗舒适度差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05），无湿化氧疗组吸氧护理消耗时间短于湿化氧疗组，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05），无湿化氧疗组的医疗成本支出少于湿化氧疗组。结论 无湿化的中低流量给氧对患者的吸氧后血氧饱和度和氧疗舒适度没有影响，但缩短了吸氧消耗护理时间，降低了医疗成本支出，可在基层医疗机构患者中应用。

关键词

无湿化给氧；中低流量；基层医疗机构；氧疗效果

Abstract

Objective To explore the feasibility of non-humidified medium and low flow oxygen therapy in patients of primary medical institutions.
Methods A total of 142 patients who underwent low- and medium-flow oxygen therapy from 2022 to 2023 were randomly divided into 70 patients in the humidified oxygen therapy group and 72 patients in the non-humidified oxygen therapy group. The oxygen saturation, oxygen therapy comfort, oxygen consumption and nursing time and medical cost of the two groups were compared.
Results There was no significant difference in blood oxygen saturation and oxygen therapy comfort between the humidified oxygen therapy group and the non-humidified oxygen therapy group (P＞0.05), and the consumption time of oxygen inhalation care in the non-humidified oxygen therapy group was shorter than that in the humidified oxygen therapy group (P＜0.05), and the medical cost expenditure in the non-humidified oxygen therapy group was less than that in the humidified oxygen therapy group.
Conclusion   The low- and medium-flow oxygen administration without humidification had no effect on the oxygen saturation and oxygen therapy comfort of patients after oxygen inhalation, but it shortened the nursing time of oxygen inhalation consumption and reduced the medical cost, which could be applied to patients in primary medical institutions.

Key words

Non-humidified oxygen therapy, Medium and low flow rate, Primary medical institution, Effect of oxygen therapy