透過您的圖書館登入
IP:18.118.140.108
  • 學位論文

外傷性腦受傷患者使用高壓氧治療之成效分析

Analysis the effect on Hyperbaric oxygen therapy for Traumatic Brain Injury.

指導教授 : 邱文達
共同指導教授 : 蔡行瀚(Shin-Han Tsai)

摘要


外傷性腦受傷在所有事故傷害中,是致死率及失能率最高的;台北市每十人萬口有116.5人/年,因外傷性腦受傷而死亡。 現今高壓氧治療逐漸受到重視與推廣,治療範疇也逐漸擴大,本研究目的在於探討外傷性腦受傷病患使用高壓氧之預後成效,分析病患基本資料,並比較GCS、受傷嚴重度、高壓氧治療次數等變項與預後(GOS、GOSE、DRS)之間是否有顯著差異。 本研究使用之高壓氧設備為多人加壓艙(可容納10人座位),治療壓力為2絕對大氣壓,一次的治療時間為1小時50分鐘。自北市某醫學中心收集22例使用高壓氧治療外傷性腦受傷之病患,並隨機配對抽選外傷性腦受傷資料庫22例未使用高壓氧治療之病患為對照組來進行相關比較與分析。結果發現,兩組都以男性佔較多數, HBOT組平均年齡為34.8歲,控制組為40.1歲。HBOT組的GCS,從8分進步到13.63分;而控制組則是由7.9分進步到8.04分,並有達到統計上的顯著差異(P<0.05)。兩組在受傷後三個月的GOSE皆較受傷後一個月進步0.5分,HBOT組的GOSE,從4.18分進步到4.68分;而控制組則是由4分進步到4.5分。 受傷到開始接受高壓氧治療之間距天數與GOSE之相關情形,則發現每延後一天接受治療,GOSE會下降0.05917分,且達到統計上的顯著意義(P<0.05)。以嚴重度分層後,發現嚴重外傷性腦受傷患者,每延後一天接受治療,GOSE會下降0.03088分,且達到統計上的顯著意義(P<0.05)。而在中度外傷性腦受傷患者部分,每延後一天接受治療,GOSE會下降0.04885分,但未達到統計上的顯著意義(P>0.05)。表示嚴重外傷性腦受傷患者比中度外傷性腦受傷患者更需要即早接受高壓氧的治療。 綜合上述,研究發現HBOT組在出入院GCS及嚴重度,較控制組恢復良好,且即早接受高壓氧治療,預後也會得到較好的進步。

關鍵字

外傷性腦受傷 高壓氧治療 GOS GOSE DRS

並列摘要


In all injuries, traumatic brain injury (TBI) has the highest rate of mortality and disability. Therefore, it is an important issue to decrease the mortality and disability of TBI patients. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) in TBI patients is controversial in the past several decades. In this study, we evaluated the HBOT prognosis of TBI patients with the data of their Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS), Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOSE), and Disability Rating Scale (DRS), Glasgow coma scale (GCS), the score of the injury severity, and the times of their receiving HBOT. Ten patients received HBOT in a pressurized chamber. The treatment used with two absolute atmospheric pressure for 110 minutes. We collected two groups of TBI patients: 22 of them received HBOT and 22 did not received HBOT. The results of two groups of patients showed significant number of male patients. The average age in HBOT group was 34.8 years old while that in the control group was 40.1 years old. The improvement of the GCS in HBOT group was 8 to 13.63 points and that in the control group was 7.9 to 8.04.The differences of improvement scores of the two groups were significant (p<0.05). Moreover, both groups showed the GOSE improvement of 0.5 points from 3 to 1 month after the injury. The results of the study showed that the correlation scores existed between the days elapsed from the injury happened to the day that the patients’ HBOT and that the delay of HBOT was 0.05917 points lower (p<0.05) in GOS between the treated or the controlled group. Also significant difference was showed in their injury severity of the two groups for every one day of delayed therapy by 0.03088 points (p < 0.05). In conclusion, the data of this study showed that group HBOT had better recovery rate than control group in GCS and the injury severity.

並列關鍵字

TBI HBO GOS GOSE DRS

參考文獻


43.黃南捷(2003)。奇美高壓氧中心。
41.黃吉田、葉慶輝、張陸澎(2003)。高壓氧治療簡介。基層醫學,18(4),95-99。
35.陳興漢(2001)。高壓氧治療對臨床疾病之應用。健康世界,8,107-111。
49.顏翠瑜、洪千淳、陳美燕、鄭雅玲、于振東、張耀中、詹賜貳、虞希堯(2001)。高壓氧治療的併發症。台灣醫學,5(1), 83-86。
44.黃乃勤(2005)。實證醫學下之嚴重頭部外傷治療。慈濟醫學,17(5), 1-6。

延伸閱讀