中药灌肠联合腹部穴位按摩、西医常规治疗在肝炎肝硬化便秘患者中的应用效果分析  

Effect analysis of traditional Chinese medicine enema combined with abdominal acupoint massage and conventional Western medicine treatment in hepatitis cirrhosis patients with constipation

作　　者：高爽 贾钰[1] 王基实 GAO Shuang;JIA Yu;WANG Ji-shi(Department of Hepatology,Shenyang Sixth People's Hospital,Shenyang 110006,China)

机构地区：[1]沈阳市第六人民医院中西医结合肝病内科,110006 [2]辽宁中医药大学,110847

出　　处：《中国现代药物应用》2023年第21期133-137,共5页Chinese Journal of Modern Drug Application

摘　　要：目的 研究肝炎肝硬化便秘患者采用中药灌肠联合腹部穴位按摩、西医常规治疗的临床疗效。方法 50例肝炎肝硬化便秘患者,采用随机数字表法分为对照组和观察组,每组25例。对照组患者采用西医常规治疗联合腹部穴位按摩,观察组患者在对照组基础上加用中药灌肠。比较两组患者临床疗效及治疗前后排便情况、肛门直肠测压水平、生活质量。结果 观察组患者的临床总有效率为96.00%,高于对照组的68.00%,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。治疗后,两组患者排便时间均短于本组治疗前,排便次数多于本组治疗前,排便困难程度评分低于本组治疗前,且观察组患者排便时间(8.12±0.58)min/次短于对照组的(15.74±1.49)min/次,排便次数(6.91±0.75)次/周多于对照组的(4.44±0.57)次/周,排便困难程度评分(0.83±0.11)分低于对照组的(1.36±0.22)分,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。治疗后,两组患者肛管静息压、肛管最大收缩压均低于本组治疗前,持续挤压时间短于本组治疗前,且观察组患者肛管静息压(65.14±6.65)mm Hg(1 mm Hg=0.133 kPa)、肛管最大收缩压(161.84±18.23)mm Hg低于对照组的(78.71±8.98)、(196.17±19.39)mm Hg,持续挤压时间(7.42±1.22)s短于对照组的(11.84±1.88)s,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。治疗后,两组患者生理功能、生理职能、情感职能、活力、社会功能、躯体疼痛、精神健康评分均高于本组治疗前,且观察组患者生理功能、生理职能、情感职能、活力、社会功能、躯体疼痛、精神健康评分分别为(85.14±7.66)、(83.85±7.48)、(85.43±7.22)、(86.16±7.65)、(83.85±8.44)、(85.43±7.22)、(86.31±7.52)分,高于对照组的(78.77±8.99)、(75.13±8.67)、(77.86±8.55)、(78.72±7.98)、(75.12±7.67)、(77.81±8.55)、(77.63±7.14)分,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论 在西医常规治疗基础上,肝炎肝硬化便秘患者采用中药灌肠联合腹部穴位按摩治疗能�Objective To study the clinical efficacy of traditional Chinese medicine enema combined with abdominal acupoint massage and conventional Western medicine treatment in hepatitis cirrhosis patients with constipation.Methods A total of 50 cases of hepatitis cirrhosis patients with constipation were divided into a control group and an observation group according to the random numerical table,with 25 cases in each group.The control group was treated with conventional Western medicine and abdominal acupoint massage,and the observation group was treated with traditional Chinese medicine enema on the basis of the control group.The clinical efficacy,defecation,anorectal manometry and quality of life before and after treatment were compared between the two groups.Results The total clinical effective rate of 96.00%in the observation group was higher than that of 68.00%in the control group,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).After treatment,the defecation time in both groups was shorter than that before treatment in this group,the defecation frequency was more than that before treatment in this group,and the score of defecation difficulty was lower than that before treatment in this group;the defecation time of(8.12±0.58)min/time in the observation group was shorter than that of(15.74±1.49)min/time in the control group;the defecation frequency of(6.91±0.75)times/week in the observation group was higher than that of(4.44±0.57)times/week in the control group;the score of defecation difficulty of(0.83±0.11)points in the observation group was lower than that of(1.36±0.22)points in the control group;the differences were statistically significant(P<0.05).After treatment,the anal resting pressure and anal maximum contraction pressure in both groups were lower than those before treatment in this group,and the continuous extrusion time was shorter than that before treatment in this group;the anal resting pressure of(65.14±6.65)mm Hg(1 mm Hg=0.133 kPa)and anal maximum contraction pressure of(161.84±18.23)m

关 键 词：肝炎肝硬化 便秘 腹部穴位按摩 中药灌肠 常规西医治疗 效果 

分 类 号：R575[医药卫生—消化系统]