Intensive & critical care nursing · 2020
Increasing suction pressure during endotracheal suctioning increases the volume of suctioned secretions, but not procedure-related complications: A comparative study in open system endotracheal suctioning.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Bülbül Maraş Gül, Eşer İsmet, Şenoğlu Nimet, Özkalay Yılmaz Nisel, Karaca Derici Yeşer
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To compare the effect of three different suction pressures (80 mmHg, 150 mmHg, 250 mmHg) with the open system suction method in terms of the volume of secretions and complications development in intubated intensive care patients.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY/DESIGN: This study was planned as a prospective, experimental, self-controlled design. The study sample included 47 patients. Data were collected using a data collection and patient follow-up form from patient records.
SETTING: Single adult intensive care unit in a university hospital.
RESULTS: Fifty five percent of the patients were male, 61.7% were older than 65 years and 38.32% had lung infection. The amount of suctioned secretions tended to increase significantly with increasing negative pressure and there was a significant difference between the pressures in terms of the median volume of suctioned secretions (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the suction pressures in terms of oxygen desaturation, hypertension rates (p > 0.05). Tachycardia, bradycardia, hypoxaemia, tracheal mucosal damage or mucosal bleeding were not observed during suctioning with three different suction pressures.
CONCLUSION: It may be assumed that 250 mmHg suction pressure, via compliance with open system suction method related procedures, is being more effective and equally safe for secretion cleaning in comparison to the 80 and 150 mmHg suction pressures.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY/DESIGN: This study was planned as a prospective, experimental, self-controlled design. The study sample included 47 patients. Data were collected using a data collection and patient follow-up form from patient records.
SETTING: Single adult intensive care unit in a university hospital.
RESULTS: Fifty five percent of the patients were male, 61.7% were older than 65 years and 38.32% had lung infection. The amount of suctioned secretions tended to increase significantly with increasing negative pressure and there was a significant difference between the pressures in terms of the median volume of suctioned secretions (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the suction pressures in terms of oxygen desaturation, hypertension rates (p > 0.05). Tachycardia, bradycardia, hypoxaemia, tracheal mucosal damage or mucosal bleeding were not observed during suctioning with three different suction pressures.
CONCLUSION: It may be assumed that 250 mmHg suction pressure, via compliance with open system suction method related procedures, is being more effective and equally safe for secretion cleaning in comparison to the 80 and 150 mmHg suction pressures.