60例成人患者拔管后肺量测定和神经肌肉功能测量比较标准术后临床评估与四训练比值≥0.9患者预后的研究。

IF 16.4 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Accounts of Chemical Research Pub Date : 2023-03-08 DOI:10.12659/MSMBR.938849
Chunlong Chen, Qingzhen Liu, Hong Fan, Zhiyang Yu, Xueyan Leng, Lidong Zhang, Zhiqiang Zhou
{"title":"60例成人患者拔管后肺量测定和神经肌肉功能测量比较标准术后临床评估与四训练比值≥0.9患者预后的研究。","authors":"Chunlong Chen,&nbsp;Qingzhen Liu,&nbsp;Hong Fan,&nbsp;Zhiyang Yu,&nbsp;Xueyan Leng,&nbsp;Lidong Zhang,&nbsp;Zhiqiang Zhou","doi":"10.12659/MSMBR.938849","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BACKGROUND Postoperative tracheal extubation requires optimal timing to ensure patient safety and normal muscle function. The train-of-four ratio (TOFR) of the fourth muscle response compared with the first indicates a non-depolarizing neuromuscular block, and a ratio ≥0.9 can be used as an objective measurement of neuromuscular reversal. This study of 60 adult patients who underwent elective surgery with general anesthesia that included the neuromuscular blocking agent cisatracurium aimed to compare standard postoperative clinical assessment with the TOFR ≥0.9 on patient outcomes using postoperative neuromuscular function assessed by grip strength and ability to sit up unaided and spirometry measurements following extubation. MATERIAL AND METHODS The 30 patients extubated postoperatively in the TOF group were required to have a TOFR ≥0.9, while the 30 patients in the clinical assessment group were awake and following simple commands and had a 5-second head lift and spontaneous breathing with acceptable oxygenation. The main outcomes were the incentive spirometry and grip strength and ability to sit up unaided measured at 10, 30, 50 min and 24 h after extubation. RESULTS The groups had no difference in recovery path of incentive spirometry volume (P=0.072) and no difference in postoperative incentive spirometry decrease from baseline except at 10 min after extubation (P=0.005). There was no difference in handgrip strength and independent sitting between groups. CONCLUSIONS The findings showed that using the TOF ratio ≥0.9 before extubation did not improve early postoperative strength quantified by spirometry volume, handgrip strength, and proportion of unaided sitting.</p>","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/86/f7/medscimonitbasicres-29-e938849.PMC10010054.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Study of 60 Adult Patients to Compare Standard Postoperative Clinical Assessment with Train-of-Four Ratio ≥0.9 on Patient Outcomes Using Postoperative Spirometry and Neuromuscular Function Measurements Following Extubation.\",\"authors\":\"Chunlong Chen,&nbsp;Qingzhen Liu,&nbsp;Hong Fan,&nbsp;Zhiyang Yu,&nbsp;Xueyan Leng,&nbsp;Lidong Zhang,&nbsp;Zhiqiang Zhou\",\"doi\":\"10.12659/MSMBR.938849\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>BACKGROUND Postoperative tracheal extubation requires optimal timing to ensure patient safety and normal muscle function. The train-of-four ratio (TOFR) of the fourth muscle response compared with the first indicates a non-depolarizing neuromuscular block, and a ratio ≥0.9 can be used as an objective measurement of neuromuscular reversal. This study of 60 adult patients who underwent elective surgery with general anesthesia that included the neuromuscular blocking agent cisatracurium aimed to compare standard postoperative clinical assessment with the TOFR ≥0.9 on patient outcomes using postoperative neuromuscular function assessed by grip strength and ability to sit up unaided and spirometry measurements following extubation. MATERIAL AND METHODS The 30 patients extubated postoperatively in the TOF group were required to have a TOFR ≥0.9, while the 30 patients in the clinical assessment group were awake and following simple commands and had a 5-second head lift and spontaneous breathing with acceptable oxygenation. The main outcomes were the incentive spirometry and grip strength and ability to sit up unaided measured at 10, 30, 50 min and 24 h after extubation. RESULTS The groups had no difference in recovery path of incentive spirometry volume (P=0.072) and no difference in postoperative incentive spirometry decrease from baseline except at 10 min after extubation (P=0.005). There was no difference in handgrip strength and independent sitting between groups. CONCLUSIONS The findings showed that using the TOF ratio ≥0.9 before extubation did not improve early postoperative strength quantified by spirometry volume, handgrip strength, and proportion of unaided sitting.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/86/f7/medscimonitbasicres-29-e938849.PMC10010054.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12659/MSMBR.938849\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12659/MSMBR.938849","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景术后气管拔管需要最佳时机,以确保患者安全和正常肌肉功能。第四个肌肉反应的训练比率(TOFR)与第一个肌肉反应的训练比率(TOFR)相比表明神经肌肉阻滞未去极化,比率≥0.9可作为神经肌肉逆转的客观测量。本研究对60例接受选择性手术全麻(包括神经肌肉阻断剂顺阿曲库铵)的成年患者进行研究,目的是比较标准的术后临床评估与TOFR≥0.9的患者结果,采用术后神经肌肉功能评估,包括握力和独立坐起的能力以及拔管后的肺活量测量。材料与方法TOF组30例术后拔管患者TOFR≥0.9,而临床评估组30例患者清醒,服从简单指令,5秒头抬高,氧合可接受的自主呼吸。主要结果是在拔管后10、30、50分钟和24小时测量肺活量、握力和独立坐起能力。结果两组患者激励性肺活量恢复路径差异无统计学意义(P=0.072),除拔管后10 min外,两组患者术后激励性肺活量较基线下降差异无统计学意义(P=0.005)。两组之间的握力和独立坐姿没有差异。结论:拔管前TOF比值≥0.9并不能改善术后早期的力量(以肺活量、握力和独立坐位比例为量化指标)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Study of 60 Adult Patients to Compare Standard Postoperative Clinical Assessment with Train-of-Four Ratio ≥0.9 on Patient Outcomes Using Postoperative Spirometry and Neuromuscular Function Measurements Following Extubation.

BACKGROUND Postoperative tracheal extubation requires optimal timing to ensure patient safety and normal muscle function. The train-of-four ratio (TOFR) of the fourth muscle response compared with the first indicates a non-depolarizing neuromuscular block, and a ratio ≥0.9 can be used as an objective measurement of neuromuscular reversal. This study of 60 adult patients who underwent elective surgery with general anesthesia that included the neuromuscular blocking agent cisatracurium aimed to compare standard postoperative clinical assessment with the TOFR ≥0.9 on patient outcomes using postoperative neuromuscular function assessed by grip strength and ability to sit up unaided and spirometry measurements following extubation. MATERIAL AND METHODS The 30 patients extubated postoperatively in the TOF group were required to have a TOFR ≥0.9, while the 30 patients in the clinical assessment group were awake and following simple commands and had a 5-second head lift and spontaneous breathing with acceptable oxygenation. The main outcomes were the incentive spirometry and grip strength and ability to sit up unaided measured at 10, 30, 50 min and 24 h after extubation. RESULTS The groups had no difference in recovery path of incentive spirometry volume (P=0.072) and no difference in postoperative incentive spirometry decrease from baseline except at 10 min after extubation (P=0.005). There was no difference in handgrip strength and independent sitting between groups. CONCLUSIONS The findings showed that using the TOF ratio ≥0.9 before extubation did not improve early postoperative strength quantified by spirometry volume, handgrip strength, and proportion of unaided sitting.

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
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
期刊最新文献
The change process questionnaire (CPQ): A psychometric validation. Differential Costs of Raising Grandchildren on Older Mother-Adult Child Relations in Black and White Families. Does Resilience Mediate the Relationship Between Negative Self-Image and Psychological Distress in Middle-Aged and Older Gay and Bisexual Men? Intergenerational Relations and Well-being Among Older Middle Eastern/Arab American Immigrants During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Caregiving Appraisals and Emotional Valence: Moderating Effects of Activity Participation.
×
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