Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2004 Dec;34(7):1315-25.
doi: 10.4040/jkan.2004.34.7.1315.

[Effects of a closed endotracheal suction system on oxygen saturation, ventilator-associated pneumonia, and nursing efficacy]

[Article in Korean]
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

[Effects of a closed endotracheal suction system on oxygen saturation, ventilator-associated pneumonia, and nursing efficacy]

[Article in Korean]
Eun-Sook Lee et al. Taehan Kanho Hakhoe Chi. 2004 Dec.

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of a closed endotracheal suction system(CES) on oxygen saturation, ventilator associated pneumonia(VAP), and nursing efficacy in mechanically ventilated patients.

Method: This study was conducted in the intensive care unit of a University Hospital in Gwangju City. Data was collected from July to October, 2003. Seventy mechanically ventilated patients were randomly divided into two groups; 32 for CES and 38 for open endotracheal suction system(OES) protocol. Twenty one nurses were also involved to examine the nurses' attitude of usefulness about CES.

Result: SaO(2) was significantly different between CES and OES. The incidence of VAP in CES was lower than that of OES. Nursing efficacy was related to time, cost, and usefulness of the suction system. Time of suctioning in CES was shorter than that of OES. CES also contributed significantly to lower the cost of treatment than OES. The usefulness score of CES increased after 6 months of use.

Conclusion: CES prevented VAP, was cost effective, and a safe suctioning system. CES ncan be used with patients with sensitivity to hypoxygenation and with a high risk of VAP.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources