Nasal intermittent positive-pressure ventilation offers no advantages over nasal continuous positive airway pressure in apnea of prematurity.

Machine translation Machine translation
作者 Ryan CA, Finer NN, Peters KL
类别 Primary study
期刊American journal of diseases of children (1960)
Year 1989
連結 Pubmed, DOI

此文章收錄於 2 Systematic reviews Systematic reviews (2 references)

Loading references information
一项前瞻性，随机，交叉试验进行比较鼻间歇正压通气经鼻持续气道正压通气婴儿的妊娠不到32周的疗效。持续气道正压交付为4 cm H2O，呼气末压力为20 cm H2O，呼气末压力为4 cm H2O过程中使用鼻间歇正压通气，通气率每分钟20次，而峰值压力。类似的交叉鼻间歇正压通气期间在6小时内，病人经鼻持续气道正压通气呼吸暂停和心动过缓的频率和程度进行了比较。虽然婴儿略显不足每小时呼吸暂停频繁发作（0.6 + / - 0.7比0.5 + / - 0.7），每小时心动过缓（1.2 + / - 1.3比0.9 + / - 1.0）在经鼻间歇正压通气，这些差异并不显着。有评估的时间及经皮氧分压下降，呼吸暂停和心脏心动过缓率在这些事件的严重程度无显着差异。整个研究过程中，有没有显着的变化，血液中的气体。经鼻间歇正压通气有没有优势鼻持续气道正压，防止呼吸暂停，并没有改变气体交换妊娠不到32周的婴儿。
This translation has been produced by an automated software. If you wish to submit your own translation, please send it to translations@epistemonikos.org
Epistemonikos ID: 0cd1e3e125f31d3d62d698f8c3c5d2b15c851f32
First added on: Jan 31, 2013
Warning
This is a machine translation from an article in Epistemonikos.

Machine translations cannot be considered reliable in order to make health decisions.

See an official translation in the following languages: English

If you prefer to see the machine translation we assume you accept our terms of use