加護病房放置氣管內管病人使用氣管內管固定器是否可減少壓傷發生率Patients with endotrachea tube use the endotracheal fixer that can reduce the incidence of pressure sores at intensive care unit?

4414 7 261         DOI:doi.org/10.30131/TWNA_EBHC_Library.DB_2021010001B/Text

2022-05-20 已刊登
綜 整 預防/治療/介入類型

作  者

黃美珍 林文慧* 陳婷婉 羅秋燕 賴堯暉

文章類別

B 類:實證健康照護應用

問題類型

治療/預防性問題

健康狀況

皮膚系統 (Dermatology)  其他 (other)  

治療/介入措施

其他(Others) - 氣管內管固定器

專長類別

急重症暨手術護理

中文關鍵詞

#經口咽氣管插管病人 #氣管內管固定器 #常規固定 #壓傷

英文關鍵詞

# Patient with endotracheal tube # endotracheal tube fixator # routine securement #ulcer

機構名稱

馬偕紀念醫院台東分院附設居家護理所

申請單位

新竹馬偕紀念醫院

中文摘要

形成臨床提問:
約67%加護病房急重症病患有放置氣管內管,研究指出使用氣管內管無法吞嚥唾液,嘴唇無法閉合及唾液減少使口腔中病原菌增加,造成口腔黏膜乾燥及黏膜抗壓力差;氣管內管傳統固定方式以棉繩或黏膠固定於嘴角且緊貼皮膚,氣管內管不易更換位置,使皮膚血循減少及皮膚受壓使作用力上升,導致皮膚壓傷;常見發生口腔損傷部位於嘴唇、硬軟顎等,每位病人均有2處以上病灶。執行介入措施前插管導致顏面及口腔黏膜壓傷率40.2%,常見部位嘴角(50.1%)、嘴唇(20%)等。 使用氣管內管固定器在接觸皮膚黏膜面積較小,可以隨著滑軌更換管路位置,可降低皮膚損傷機率,亦提供較佳的視野清潔口腔,降低感染機率;使用氣管內管固定器較傳統固定方式益處較多,引發動機探討改變氣管內管使用固定器是否可以減少皮膚黏膜損傷機率,以提升臨床照護品質。
文獻搜尋的方法與分析:
使用PICO中英文關鍵字、MeSH term、切截字,運用布林邏輯運算搜尋資料庫,查閱1990年1月至2019年12月之文獻,排除重複和不符合條件文獻,搜尋共5篇均為隨機臨床試驗與PICO相符文獻進行評析。
文獻的品質評讀與結果:
2019年CASP 評讀工具進行評讀,進行評析五篇RCT文獻,以Oxford CEBM 2011 Levels of Evidence的評析所得文獻之等級,RCT五篇文獻為Level 2,文獻中支持意見,顯示使用固定器簡便方式更換管路位置,減少單一位置受壓,而減少壓傷發生。因此探討其中文獻內容設計臨床照護流程,使用實證方式比較兩組皮膚破損之差異。
證據之臨床應用:
自108年8月使用固定器共收案16人,使用,男性12人,女性4人,平均年齡為62.2歲;收納條件為成年、無黏膜及皮膚破損,且無其他合併症者;分為一般常規組、固定器兩組,以電腦隨機分派病人、採單盲方式,照護方式均相同,三班評估皮膚、口腔黏膜皮膚狀況,於病人置放氣管內管期間由三班護理人員評估,使用一般棉繩及固定器於氣管內管對口腔黏膜及臉部周圍壓傷之情形。
成效評值:
自108年8月10日至108年10月12日共收案36人,一般常規組20人(55.5%)為男性12人、女性8人,平均年齡為60.4 歲,固定器組16人(44.4%)為男性12 人、女性4人,平均年齡為62.2歲,使用介入措施後黏膜損傷p:0.06,發生率為固定器組:2.8%、常規組:16.7%、唾液性質改變p: 0.05,發生率為固定組:8.3%、常規組:19.4%,其他項目均無顯著差異;皮膚項目嘴唇周圍破損p:0.04,發生率為固定組:8.3%、常規組:19.4%,其他項目均無顯著差異,結果與文獻些微差異。
結論與建議:
整合文獻與臨床結果,此次臨床結果嘴唇周圍皮膚破損的狀況較明顯改善,黏膜壓傷發生率有顯著差異;訪談醫護人員了解使用氣管內管固定器可增加口腔內視野,提升口腔清潔的範圍,建議提早在置放氣管內管時使用氣管內管固定器,能有效降低氣管內管嘴唇黏膜壓力、壓傷發生率,提升病人舒適及護理照護品質。

英文摘要

Ask an answerable question (PICO):
Approximately 67% of critically ill adults requiring endotracheal intubation in intensive care unit. There are many potential complications during endotracheal tube intubation, such as: swallowing impairment, opening mouth and reduction of production saliva, which increase the pathogenic bacteria in oral cavity, resulting in dry oral mucosa and irritates oral mucosa by pressure. Traditional endotracheal tube securement techniques with adhesive tape or cotton rope, these was inconvenience to reposition the tube, which might leads poor circulation and caused facial skin tears, every patient has average two lesions, irritants of oral mucosa were most common area reported. Before implement intervention, facial skin tears and irritants oral mucosa were 40.2%, most irritant regions were corners of mouth 50.1% and lip 20%. Endotracheal tube fixator could reduce the pressure to contact skin and oral mucosa, better sight to perform oral care, reduce ventilator-associated pneumonia. Endotracheal tube fixation to be more beneficial than traditional fixation methods, this study aims to improve the quality of clinical care to reduce complications among critically ill adults undergoing endotracheal intubation.
The Method and Analysis of Literature Review:
This study builds up a question with PICO related Chinese and English keywords, synonyms, cut-off words. According to the keywords (MeSH) and their synonyms. Using Boolean Logic to develop strategy to search the database since January 1990 till December 2019. Based on five selected articles in accordance with PICO were reviewed based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Critical Appraisal:
The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP, 2019) and level of Evidence published by CEBM(Oxford University, 2011) was used to appraise the quality of five reviewed studies. Five RCTs literatures were Level 2, the searched literature supports securement of an endotracheal tube with a tube fixator resulted in a lower incidence of and fewer patients experiencing lip ulcers, endotracheal tube dislodgements, or facial skin tears compared to securement with adhesive tape or cotton rope. This study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of endotracheal tube securement techniques, in comparing the effect of adhesive tape versus endotracheal tube fixator on complications.
Clinical Application of Evidence:
This study assessed total of 16 patients in August 2019, patients with 12 male and 4 female, 40.2% of irritants of oral mucosa was noted before implement of intervention, the most common were found in corners of mouth (50.1%), lips (20%).Patients were randomly allocated in single-blind manner. All patients were underwent with similar nursing care, with regular monitoring skin and oral mucosa status, nursing care will be assessed by three-shift staff nurses, to record both groups’ oral mucosa and facial ulcer conditions.
Evaluation of Effectiveness:
This study was carried out with 36 Patients admitted to the MICU from 10 August 2019 to12 October 2019, 20 were randomized in control groups, 12 males and 8 in females, the average aged were 60.4 years old. 16 were randomized in experimental group, 12 males and in females, the average aged were 62.2 years old. Post intervention, a composite of presence irritant of oral mucosa fixator group 2.8%, cotton rope group16.7%, p =0.06; a composite of presence salivary changes fixator group8.3%, cotton rope group19.4%, p =0.05. facial skin tears p =0.04. Other results has no statistically significant.
Conclusions and Recommendations:
In conclusion, this study has demonstrated critically ill patients, securement of an endotracheal tube with a tube fixator has resulted in a lower incidence of lip ulcer, skin tears reported compared to cotton rope groups. During interview with staff nurses, has reported better oral sight to perform oral hygiene. This study suggested securing endotracheal tube with tube fixator earlier, which has showed better effect for fewer patients to experience oral mucosa ulcer and pressure ulcer incidences, which enhance to perform optimal nursing care and ensure patient comfort and safety care.