机构地区:[1]解放军总医院第一医学中心肝胆胰外科医学部,北京100853 [2]解放军总医院第六医学中心中医医学部,北京100048
出 处:《空军航空医学》2024年第4期335-339,共5页AVIATION MEDICINE OF AIR FORCE
摘 要:目的 探讨耳穴贴压配合穴位按摩改善胰腺癌化疗引起不良反应的临床疗效。方法 将93例胰腺癌化疗患者随机分为对照组、试验1组和试验2组,各31例。对照组行常规治疗,试验1组在常规治疗基础上加以耳穴贴压;试验2组则在常规治疗基础上予以耳穴贴压联合穴位按摩治疗,观察3组干预前后恶心呕吐、疲乏等躯体症状及自我效能状况。结果 在干预48 h后,3组恶心、呕吐得分较干预后12、24 h均降低(P均<0.001);对照组中文版罗德恶心及呕吐指数评分估量表得分高于试验1组和试验2组(P=0.009、<0.001),且试验1组得分高于试验2组(P=0.014)。在干预48 h后,3组Piper疲乏评估修订量表评分均低于干预后12、24 h(P均<0.001),试验1组、试验2组均低于对照组(P=0.038、0.012),而试验1组与试验2组比较差异无统计学意义(P=0.969)。在干预48 h后,对照组癌症自我效能感量表评分较干预后12、24 h降低(P均<0.001),试验1、试验2组评分较干预后12、24 h均升高(P均<0.001);试验1组、试验2组癌症自我效能感量表评分均高于对照组(P均<0.001),而试验2组略高于试验1组(P=0.132)。结论 相较于胰腺癌的常规治疗方法,耳穴贴压配合穴位按摩可有效降低化疗过程中的不良反应程度,降低恶心、呕吐和疲乏的发生率,缓解患者治疗压力,增强患者的自我效能感,促进患者更积极地面对胰腺癌治疗,具备临床推广应用价值。Objective To explore the curative effect of auricular point sticking and pressing combined with acupoint massage against adverse reactions of chemotherapy among pancreatic cancer patients.Methods Ninetythree patients under pancreatic cancer chemotherapy were randomized to the control group,experimental group A and in experimental group B,with 31 in each group.Patients in the control group underwent conventional treatment,those in experimental group A received conventional treatment plus auricular point sticking and pressing,and those in experimental group B were given conventional treatment plus auricular point sticking and pressing and acupuncture massage.The physical symptoms of nausea,vomiting,fatigue and self-efficacy were observed.Results After 48 h of intervention,the Index of Nausea,Vomiting and Retching of all 3 groups were lower than those at 12 h and 24 h after intervention(all P<o.001);the Index of Nausea,Vomiting and Retching of the control group were higher than those of the trial 1 and 2 groups(P<0.009,P<0.001,respectively),and the scores of the trial 1 group were higher than those of the trial 2 group(P=0.014).After 48 h of intervention,the scores of Piper Fatigue Scale-Revised were lower in all 3 groups than at 12 h and 24 h post-intervention(all P<0.001);the scores of Piper Fatigue Scale-Revised scores were lower in trial 1 and 2 groups than in the control group(P<0.038,P<0.012,respectively),and there was no difference between trial 1 group and 2 group(P=0.969).After 48h of intervention,the scores of Strategies Used by People to Promote Health decreased in the control group compared to 12 h and 24 h post-intervention(both P<0.001),while the scores in trial 1 and 2 groups increased compared to 12 h and 24 h post-intervention(both P<0.001);the scores of Strategies Used by People to Promote Health in trial 1 and 2 groups were significantly higher than those in the control group(both P<0.001),while the scores in trial 2 group were slightly higher than those in trial 1 group(P=0.132).Conclusion Compar
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...