Application of Visual Artificial Airway in Patients with ARDS Assisted by Pulmonary Ultrasound

Abstract

Objective. To explore the application of pulmonary ultrasound in visual nursing of artificial airway in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Methods. Seventy-eight ARDS patients with mechanical ventilation admitted from February 2021 to January 2022 were included and divided into the intervention group and the control group. The control group was given routine airway nursing, and the intervention group was given visual airway nursing management through lung ultrasound. The arterial blood gas analysis indexes, mechanical ventilation time, ICU treatment time, total hospitalization time, aspiration, and the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) were compared between the two groups. Results. After treatment, PaO2, PaCO2, SPO2, and oxygenation indexes were significantly improved compared with those before treatment, and the indexes in the intervention group were better than those in the control group after treatment, and the differences were statistically significant ( P < 0.05 ). The mechanical ventilation time ( 5.39 ± 0.68 vs. 7.92 ± 0.59 days), ICU treatment time ( 8.05 ± 1.14 vs. 10.71 ± 1.16 days), and total hospitalization time ( 12.05 ± 2.20 vs. 15.68 ± 2.18 days) in the intervention group were significantly shorter than those in the control group ( P < 0.05 ). The incidences of aspiration (2.56% vs. 15.38%) and VAP (5.13% vs. 20.51%) in the intervention group was significantly lower than that in the control group ( P < 0.05 ). Conclusion. The application of visual artificial airway management assisted by lung ultrasound in ARDS patients can shorten the treatment time and hospitalization time of mechanical ventilation, reduce the incidence of aspiration and VAP, and improve the prognosis of patients.

Retracted: Application of Visual Artificial Airway in Patients with ARDS Assisted by Pulmonary Ultrasound

“…This article has been retracted by Hindawi, as publisher, following an investigation undertaken by the publisher [1]. This investigation has uncovered evidence of systematic manipulation of the publication and peer-review process.…”