临床问题:医学证据是否支持分娩时常规口咽吸痰?

M Blake Evans, William D Po
{"title":"临床问题:医学证据是否支持分娩时常规口咽吸痰?","authors":"M Blake Evans,&nbsp;William D Po","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Oronasopharyngeal suction (ONPS) is regularly performed in neonates at delivery in many hospitals across the country today. Although ONPS is a technique that has essentially become habitual for most obstetricians, its theorized usefulness to help promote expeditious lung aeration after delivery by removal of amniotic fluid, meconium, mucus and blood that may otherwise be aspirated by the newborn, is currently not recommended. ONPS can cause vagal stimulation-induced bradycardia and thus hypercapnea, iatrogenic infection due to mucous membrane injury, and development of subsequent neonatal brain injury due to changes in cerebral blood flow regulation, particularly in premature infants. Multiple studies that have been performed comparing routine use of ONPS to no intervention controls indicate that newborns receiving ONPS took a longer time to achieve normal oxygen saturations, caused apneic episodes, and caused disturbances in heart rate (mainly bradycardia) compared to the control groups. Although the ONPS groups revealed no significantly different APGAR scores at 1 and 5 minutes, the ONPS groups took longer than the control group to reach an arterial oxygen saturation greater than or equal to 92% in the first minutes of life. Currently, Neonatal Resuscitation Program guidelines discourage the use of or meconium-stained amniotic fluid and in the absence of obvious obstruction. Furthermore, this manuscript highlights various literature sources revealing that the routine use of ONPS at the time of delivery can cause more harm than good, if any good at all.</p>","PeriodicalId":75127,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of the Oklahoma State Medical Association","volume":"109 4-5","pages":"140-2"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4918762/pdf/nihms766561.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical Question: Does Medical Evidence Support Routine Oronasopharyngeal Suction at Delivery?\",\"authors\":\"M Blake Evans,&nbsp;William D Po\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Oronasopharyngeal suction (ONPS) is regularly performed in neonates at delivery in many hospitals across the country today. Although ONPS is a technique that has essentially become habitual for most obstetricians, its theorized usefulness to help promote expeditious lung aeration after delivery by removal of amniotic fluid, meconium, mucus and blood that may otherwise be aspirated by the newborn, is currently not recommended. ONPS can cause vagal stimulation-induced bradycardia and thus hypercapnea, iatrogenic infection due to mucous membrane injury, and development of subsequent neonatal brain injury due to changes in cerebral blood flow regulation, particularly in premature infants. Multiple studies that have been performed comparing routine use of ONPS to no intervention controls indicate that newborns receiving ONPS took a longer time to achieve normal oxygen saturations, caused apneic episodes, and caused disturbances in heart rate (mainly bradycardia) compared to the control groups. Although the ONPS groups revealed no significantly different APGAR scores at 1 and 5 minutes, the ONPS groups took longer than the control group to reach an arterial oxygen saturation greater than or equal to 92% in the first minutes of life. Currently, Neonatal Resuscitation Program guidelines discourage the use of or meconium-stained amniotic fluid and in the absence of obvious obstruction. Furthermore, this manuscript highlights various literature sources revealing that the routine use of ONPS at the time of delivery can cause more harm than good, if any good at all.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":75127,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of the Oklahoma State Medical Association\",\"volume\":\"109 4-5\",\"pages\":\"140-2\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4918762/pdf/nihms766561.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of the Oklahoma State Medical Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of the Oklahoma State Medical Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目前,全国许多医院在新生儿分娩时定期对其进行口咽吸痰。尽管ONPS技术已经成为大多数产科医生的习惯,但理论上它的有用性是通过去除新生儿可能吸入的羊水、胎粪、粘液和血液来帮助分娩后快速通气,目前不推荐使用。ONPS可引起迷走神经刺激引起的心动过缓,从而导致呼吸急促,粘膜损伤引起的医源性感染,以及由于脑血流调节改变而导致的新生儿脑损伤,特别是早产儿。对常规使用ONPS与无干预对照组进行的多项研究表明,与对照组相比,接受ONPS的新生儿需要更长的时间才能达到正常的氧饱和度,引起呼吸暂停发作,并引起心率紊乱(主要是心动过缓)。尽管ONPS组在1分钟和5分钟的APGAR评分没有显著差异,但在生命的最初几分钟,ONPS组比对照组需要更长的时间才能达到大于或等于92%的动脉血氧饱和度。目前,新生儿复苏计划指南不鼓励使用或粪染色羊水,在没有明显的阻塞。此外,这份手稿强调了各种文献来源,揭示了在交付时常规使用ONPS可能会造成弊大于利,如果有任何好处的话。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Clinical Question: Does Medical Evidence Support Routine Oronasopharyngeal Suction at Delivery?

Oronasopharyngeal suction (ONPS) is regularly performed in neonates at delivery in many hospitals across the country today. Although ONPS is a technique that has essentially become habitual for most obstetricians, its theorized usefulness to help promote expeditious lung aeration after delivery by removal of amniotic fluid, meconium, mucus and blood that may otherwise be aspirated by the newborn, is currently not recommended. ONPS can cause vagal stimulation-induced bradycardia and thus hypercapnea, iatrogenic infection due to mucous membrane injury, and development of subsequent neonatal brain injury due to changes in cerebral blood flow regulation, particularly in premature infants. Multiple studies that have been performed comparing routine use of ONPS to no intervention controls indicate that newborns receiving ONPS took a longer time to achieve normal oxygen saturations, caused apneic episodes, and caused disturbances in heart rate (mainly bradycardia) compared to the control groups. Although the ONPS groups revealed no significantly different APGAR scores at 1 and 5 minutes, the ONPS groups took longer than the control group to reach an arterial oxygen saturation greater than or equal to 92% in the first minutes of life. Currently, Neonatal Resuscitation Program guidelines discourage the use of or meconium-stained amniotic fluid and in the absence of obvious obstruction. Furthermore, this manuscript highlights various literature sources revealing that the routine use of ONPS at the time of delivery can cause more harm than good, if any good at all.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Clinical question: Can virtual reality be an effective adjunctive to conventional treatment in patients with chronic lower back pain? Hospital Admission Rates and Mortality Among Emergency Department Patients with COVID-19 Discharged with Remote Patient Monitoring with or without HO2ME - A Value-Based Approach. Investigation of Geographical Disparities: The Use of An Interpolation Method For Cancer Registry Data. In patients with osteoarthritis, is curcumin, compared to placebo, effective in reducing pain? A Snapshot of Oklahoma's CHR/CHW Workforce: Results from the Region 6 Training Needs Assessment Survey, 2019.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1