ABSTRACT
Objective: To analyze the application value of heated humidifier and water humidifier of BiPAP ventilator in the treatment of type II respiratory failure. Methods: The clinical data of 50 patients with type II respiratory failure were statistically analyzed, and these patients were divided into heated humidifier group (adopted heated humidifier, n=25) and water humidifier group (adopted water humidifier, n=25) according to the difference of humidifying device of BiPAP ventilator. The PaO2, PaCO2, pH and the effect of humidifier for upper respiratory tract with dry sensation between pre-and post treatment were analyzed by statistical method. Results: The values of PaO2and pH of heated humidifier group were significantly higher than that of water humidifier group (t=4.303, t=3.182, P<0.05), respectively. While the PaCO2of heated humidifier group was significantly lower than that of water humidifier group (t=6.965, P<0.05). In the contrast of dry sensation of upper respiratory tract, the ratio of non-dry sensation in heated humidifier group was 84.0% (21/25) and it was 32.0% (8/25) in water humidification group, and the difference between the two groups was significant (x2=12.83, P<0.05). And the ratio of general dry sensation in heated humidifier group was 16.0% (4/25) and it was 40.0% (10/25) in water humidification group, and the ratio of heated humidifier group was significantly lower than that of water humidifier group (x2=5.02, P<0.05). Besides, the ratio of worst dry sensation in heated humidifier group was 0 and it was 28.0% (7/25) in water humidifier group, and the ratio of heated humidifier group was significantly lower than that of water humidifier group (x2=7.38, P<0.05). Conclusion: In the treatment of type II respiratory failure by using BiPAP ventilator, the application value and effect of heated humidifier is higher than that of water humidifier, so it is worthy to promote and use the heated humidifier in clinical practice.