穴位贴敷时长与支气管哮喘疗效的相关性探讨

发布时间：2018-05-12 08:31

  本文选题：穴位贴敷 + 贴敷时长　； 参考：《南京中医药大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：目的:运用"冬病夏治"理论,采用穴位贴敷疗法防治支气管哮喘,观察其临床疗效并探讨贴敷时长与临床疗效的关系。方法:收集162例处于缓解期的支气管哮喘患者,依据贴敷时长的不同,按随机数表分为4h组、6h组、8h组和10h组。采用中药膏贴丸贴敷,取患者双侧肺俞穴、定喘穴、膈俞穴、心俞穴、脾俞穴、肾俞穴。从夏至当日开始贴敷治疗,贴敷一次间隔7天,总共贴10次。记录4组哮喘患者治疗前及治疗结束半年后的喘息、哮鸣音、年发作次数、成人哮喘生命质量评分(AQLQ)表变化情况。结果:1、4组患者治疗后临床症状积分与治疗前比较均下降(P0.05)。疗程治疗后贴敷时长4h组疗效差于其它3组(P0.05)。贴敷时长6h组疗效与贴敷时长8h组、贴敷时长10h组比较差异有统计学意义(P0.05),贴敷时长8h组与贴敷时长10h组疗效比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。2、对4组患者治疗后喘息、哮鸣音、年发作次数进行组间比较,贴敷时长4h组各项指标的改善差于其他3组(P0.05),贴敷时长8h组与贴敷时长10h组各项指标比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05),贴敷时长8h组、贴敷时长10h组与贴敷时长6h组各项指标比较差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。3、对4组患者治疗前后AQLQ量表进行评分,发现贴敷时长4h组活动受限、哮喘症状、对刺激原的反应的改善差于其他3组(P0.05),贴敷时长8h组、贴敷时长10h组与贴敷时长6h组活动受限、哮喘症状、对刺激原的反应比较差异有统计学意义(P0.05),贴敷时长8h组与贴敷时长10h组活动受限、哮喘症状、对刺激原的反应比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。患者心理状况和对自身健康关心两部分,四组患者治疗后评分变化无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:穴位贴敷防治哮喘的临床疗效令人满意,减少了哮喘患者主症(喘息、哮鸣音)、年发作次数、改善了哮喘患者的生命质量。随着贴敷时长的延长,疗效明显提高,但当贴敷时长增加一定程度时,疗效不随贴敷时长的增加而提高,贴敷时长为8h时防治效果达到最佳。四组患者治疗后AQLQ量表中患者心理状况和对自身健康关心两部分评分变化无统计学意义(P0.05)。
[Abstract]:Objective: to observe the clinical effect and the relationship between the application time and the clinical curative effect by using the theory of "treatment of winter disease and summer", using acupoint application therapy to prevent and treat bronchial asthma. Methods: 162 patients with bronchial asthma in remission were randomly divided into 4 h group, 6 h group, 8 h group and 10 h group according to the different application time. The plaster pill was used to apply Chinese medicine to the patients with bilateral points of Feshu, Dingchuan, Geshu, Xinshu, spleen and Shenshu. From the day of the Summer Solstice application treatment, a application interval of 7 days, a total of 10 times. The changes of asthma before treatment and half a year after treatment were recorded, including wheezing, annual attack times and quality of life score (AQLQ) of adult asthma. Results the scores of clinical symptoms in the 4 groups were significantly lower than those before treatment (P 0.05). The curative effect of the group of 4 h after treatment was worse than that of the other three groups (P 0.05). There was significant difference in the curative effect between the 6h group and the 8h group, and the 10h group. There was no significant difference in the curative effect between the 8h group and the 10h group. The wheezing and wheezing were observed in the 4 groups after treatment. The number of episodes per year was compared between the groups. The improvement of the indexes in the 4 h group was worse than that in the other three groups, but there was no significant difference between the 8 h group and the 10 h group, but there was no significant difference between the 8 h group and the 8 h group. There were significant differences in the indexes between the 10 h group and the 6 h group. The scores of AQLQ scale before and after treatment were found to be limited and asthmatic symptoms were found in the 4 groups before and after treatment. The improvement of the stimulus response was worse than that of the other three groups (P 0.05), the application time was 8 h, the application time was 10 h and the time was 6 h, the activity of asthma was limited, and the symptoms of asthma were also observed. There was significant difference in the response to the stimulant (P 0.05). There was no significant difference in the response to the stimulant (P 0.05) between the 8 h group and the 10 h group with limited activity and asthmatic symptoms, and there was no significant difference in the response to the stimulator (P 0. 05%, P 0. 05%, P 0. 05%, P 0. 05%). There was no significant difference in the scores of the four groups after treatment (P 0.05). Conclusion: the clinical efficacy of acupoint application in the prevention and treatment of asthma is satisfactory, which can reduce the main symptoms (asthma, wheezing, annual attack times) and improve the quality of life of asthmatic patients. With the extension of the application time, the curative effect was obviously improved, but when the application time increased to a certain extent, the curative effect did not increase with the increase of the application time, and the prevention and cure effect was the best when the application time was 8 hours. There was no significant difference in psychological status and health care score between the four groups after treatment with AQLQ scale (P 0.05).
【学位授予单位】：南京中医药大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：R246.1

【参考文献】

相关期刊论文 前10条

1 官宇男;;白三烯受体调节剂治疗支气管扩张症的临床分析[J];中国医药指南;2016年18期

2 郭亦男;李源;;冬病夏治穴位贴敷治疗小儿咳嗽变异性哮喘临床疗效观察[J];中国实用医药;2016年02期

3 何延忠;;中西医结合内服外治治疗哮喘临床应用价值探讨[J];中国实用医药;2016年02期

4 李快乐;洪新如;孙庆华;;空气污染对儿童哮喘的不良效应[J];中华医学杂志;2016年02期

5 高小杰;尚莉丽;;支气管哮喘的中医治疗概况[J];湖南中医杂志;2015年11期

6 刘玉华;;冬病夏治穴位贴敷防治支气管哮喘作用机制研究概况[J];中医杂志;2015年21期

7 温业良;;白三烯受体调节剂治疗支气管扩张症的疗效观察[J];北方药学;2015年01期

8 李霞;代继宏;;抗趋化因子配体20抗体对哮喘小鼠气道炎症和气道高反应的抑制作用[J];第三军医大学学报;2014年12期

9 杨峰;敖素华;;149例支气管哮喘患者发病季节及节气调查分析[J];四川中医;2013年12期

10 ;中国支气管哮喘防治指南(基层版)——支气管哮喘的诊断与鉴别诊断[J];中国全科医学;2013年31期

，

本文编号：1877897