ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2021
Effect of different depth of aspiration on patients without effective cough response.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the nursing effect of deep or shallow sputum suction in the treatment of patients without cough response.
methodsA total of 144 patients receiving mechanical ventilation without an effective cough reaction were randomly divided into two groups: deep suction group (n=73) and shallow suction group (n=71). Heart rate, breathing, blood pressure, analgesia and sedation score, residual sputum volume, frequency of suction, sputum volume, improvement of phlegm sound, airway bleeding and oxygen before and after intervention were observed. Partial pressure, partial pressure of carbon dioxide and oxygenation index were used to evaluate the effect of two sputum suction methods on patients without an effective cough response.
resultsIn our study, the fluctuation of vital signs in the deep suction group was significantly higher than that in the shallow suction group. There was a statistical significance between the two groups in the vital signs after nursing intervention (P < 0.05), this mainly manifested in the heart rate, breathing, pulse pressure and airway bleeding. On the other hand, there was no statistical significance between the two groups in pulse oxygen, the Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS score) and the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS score) after nursing intervention (P > 0.05). The sputum suction effect is obviously improved in the deep sputum suction group compared with the shallow sputum suction group after nursing intervention. The improvement score of phlegm sounds in the shallow sputum suction group was (1.8±0.8) points, and that in the deep sputum suction group was (2.2±0.7) points. The analysis of blood gas was significantly improved in the deep suction group compared with the shallow suction group. There was a statistical significance between two groups in blood gas analysis index, such as oxygenation index, PaCO
conclusionDeep sputum suction has a great effect on the vital signs of patients, but there is not a serious effect on the vital signs. Shallow sputum suction does not effectively clean the airway of patients without a cough response; therefore, patients with a weak cough response need deep sputum suction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34650743PMC8507069W3206720540What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.