【摘要】：目的：本課題旨在觀察中藥足部熏洗治療小兒外感發(fā)熱退熱的臨床療效,并與清水足部熏洗組進(jìn)行對(duì)照,分析中藥足部熏洗退熱效果,為臨床尋找一種安全、有效、患兒依從性好的退熱方法。方法：將2015-03至2015-12入住廣州中醫(yī)藥大學(xué)第一附屬醫(yī)院兒科,符合納入標(biāo)準(zhǔn)及排除的84例患兒,按照入組的先后順序,奇數(shù)者為觀察組,偶數(shù)者為對(duì)照組,各42例,兩組均進(jìn)行常規(guī)抗炎抗病毒治療。當(dāng)患兒38.0℃≤腋溫≤39.0℃時(shí),觀察組給予退熱散足部熏洗,對(duì)照組給予同等條件下清水足部熏洗,記錄處理前及處理后0.5h、1.0h、2.0h、4.0h、6.0h體溫。若處理后,體溫不降反升,并且超過39.0℃則給予布洛芬口服。然后對(duì)兩組患兒在處理后0.5h、1.0h、2.0h、3.0h、4.0h、6.0h體溫、合并口服布洛芬的例數(shù)、各時(shí)間段體溫出現(xiàn)回升的例數(shù)進(jìn)行比較。結(jié)果：兩組患兒處理后0.5h、1.0h、2.0h的體溫均低于處理前,經(jīng)配對(duì)t檢驗(yàn),差異具有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(p0.05)；兩組患兒處理后0.5h、1.0h體溫降幅經(jīng)獨(dú)立樣本t檢驗(yàn)均無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(p0.05),但處理后2.0h體溫降幅顯示觀察組高于對(duì)照組,差異具有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(p0.05)；觀察組合并口服布洛芬的例數(shù)以及各時(shí)間段體溫回升的例數(shù)少于對(duì)照組,差異具有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(p0.05)。結(jié)論：中藥足部熏洗治療小兒外感發(fā)熱退熱療效觀察方面,觀察組具有退熱時(shí)間更持久,體溫不易反跳,能減少解熱鎮(zhèn)痛藥的使用頻次。該方法安全、有效、無明顯毒副作用,患兒依從性好,不失為臨床上可行性好的退熱方法,值得應(yīng)用和推廣。
[Abstract]:Objective: to observe the clinical efficacy of foot fumigation and washing in treating children with exogenous fever and to compare it with the control group, and to analyze the effect of foot fumigation and antipyretic therapy, so as to find a safe and effective method for clinical treatment. Children with good compliance with the method of antipyretic. Methods: 84 pediatrics patients admitted to the first affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of traditional Chinese Medicine from March to December 2015-2015-12 were enrolled in the study. According to the order of admission, the odd-numbered patients were selected as the observation group and the even-numbered patients as the control group (42 cases each). Both groups were treated with routine anti-inflammatory and anti-viral therapy. When the temperature of the child was 38.0 鈩，

本文編號(hào)：2384107