机构地区:[1]承德市中医院治未病科,河北承德067000 [2]承德市中医院肺病科,河北承德067000 [3]承德市中医院中医科,河北承德067000 [4]承德康复医院康复科,河北承德067000
出 处:《临床误诊误治》2024年第19期67-73,共7页Clinical Misdiagnosis & Mistherapy
基 金:承德市科技计划项目(202303A024)。
摘 要:目的探讨治未病理论下祛风解痉润燥法联合穴位贴敷治疗咳嗽变异性哮喘(CVA)的临床效果。方法将2023年1月至2024年2月收治的100例CVA患者随机数字表法分为贴敷组33例、内服组34例、联合组33例。在应用沙美特罗替卡松吸入粉雾剂基础上,贴敷组给予穴位贴敷,内服组给予祛风解痉润燥法方剂内服,联合组给予祛风解痉润燥法方剂内服联合穴位贴敷,疗程均为2周。比较3组临床疗效、治疗前后日间与夜间咳嗽症状评分、肺功能[第1秒用力呼气容积(FEV1)、FEV1/用力肺活量(FVC)、呼气流量峰值(PEF)]、炎症指标[血清白细胞介素-6(IL-6)、白细胞介素-8(IL-8)、肿瘤坏死因子-α(TNF-α)及痰液降钙素基因相关肽(CGRP)、受体活性修饰蛋白(RAMP)]、不良反应、复发率、哮喘发生率。结果联合组总有效率100.00%(33/33)高于贴敷组的72.73%(24/33)和内服组的82.35%(28/34,P<0.05)。联合组治疗后日间与夜间咳嗽症状评分低于贴敷组和内服组,且贴敷组低于内服组(P<0.05)。联合组治疗后FEV1、FEV1/FVC、PEF高于贴敷组和内服组,且贴敷组高于内服组(P<0.05)。联合组治疗后血清IL-6、IL-8、TNF-α与痰液CGRP、RAMP低于贴敷组和内服组,且内服组低于贴敷组(P<0.05)。3组不良反应总发生率比较无明显差异(P>0.05)。联合组复发率、哮喘发生率均低于内服组、贴敷组(P<0.05)。结论治未病理论下祛风解痉润燥法联合穴位贴敷治疗CVA,能优势互补,进一步提高肺功能,降低炎症反应,有效控制症状,增强疗效,降低CVA复发率及哮喘发生率,改善患者预后。Objective To explore the clinical efficacy of the Qufeng Jiejing Runzao formula combined with acupoint application in the treatment of cough variant asthma(CVA)under the theory of prevention of disease.Methods The random number table method was used to divide 100 CVA patients admitted from January 2023 to February 2024 into three groups:acupoint application group(n=33),oral administration group(n=34),and combined therapy group(n=33).On the basis of using Salmeterol/Fluticasone Propionate inhalation powder,the acupoint application group received acupoint application,the oral administration group was given oral administration of Qufeng Jiejing Runzao formula,and the combined therapy group was given oral administration of Qufeng Jiejing Runzao formula combined with acupoint application.The treatment duration was 2 weeks for all three groups.The clinical efficacy,daytime and nighttime cough symptom scores before and after treatment,lung function[forced expiratory volume in 1 second(FEV1),FEV1/forced vital capacity(FVC),peak expiratory flow(PEF)],inflammatory markers[serum interleukin-6(IL-6),interleukin-8(IL-8),tumor necrosis factor-α(TNF-α),sputum calcitonin gene-related peptide(CGRP),receptor activity modifying protein(RAMP)],as well as adverse reactions,recurrence rate,and asthma incidence were compared among the three groups.Results The total effective rate of the combined therapy group was 100.00%(33/33),which was higher than that of the acupoint application group[72.73%(24/33)]and the oral administration group[82.35%(28/34)](P<0.05).After treatment,the daytime and nighttime cough symptom scores in the combined therapy group were lower than those in the acupoint application group and the oral administration group,and the acupoint application group had lower scores than the oral administration group(P<0.05).After treatment,the FEV1,FEV1/FVC,and PEF in the combined therapy group were higher than those in the acupoint application group and the oral administration group,and the acupoint application group had highe
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...