本文選題：感染后咳嗽 + 風(fēng)熱郁肺證��； 參考：《湖南中醫(yī)藥大學(xué)》2016年碩士論文

【摘要】：目的:觀察疏風(fēng)清肺止咳方治療感染后咳嗽風(fēng)熱郁肺證的臨床療效,并對(duì)其安全性及有效性進(jìn)行評(píng)估。方法:將符合納入標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的60例感染后咳嗽患者隨機(jī)分為治療組(30例)和對(duì)照組(30例),治療組給予疏風(fēng)清肺止咳方湯劑治療,對(duì)照組給予復(fù)方甲氧那明膠囊聯(lián)合維生素C片口服治療,觀察療程均為7天。通過觀察治療前后兩組視覺模擬評(píng)分(VAS),中醫(yī)證候分級(jí)量化評(píng)分,咳嗽起效時(shí)間,疾病總療程等指標(biāo)以評(píng)估臨床療效。結(jié)果:(1)兩組總體療效比較,治療組總有效率93.33%與對(duì)照組(70%)比較,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05),說明治療組總有效率高于對(duì)照組。(2)兩組視覺模擬評(píng)分比較,治療后治療組視覺模擬評(píng)分2.57?1.89,對(duì)照組3.76?2.07,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05),說明治療組在緩解咳嗽癥狀方面優(yōu)于對(duì)照組。(3)兩組主癥積分比較,治療后治療組主癥積分為3.20?2.07,對(duì)照組為5.91?3.18,差異具有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05),說明在改善主癥上,治療組較對(duì)照組優(yōu)。(4)兩組次癥積分比較,兩組療后咽干,便干癥狀積分比較,治療組優(yōu)于對(duì)照組(P0.05),說明治療組在緩解咽干、便干癥狀方面效果更佳;兩組療后在咳痰、口干癥狀積分方面比較,兩組差異均無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05),說明兩組在緩解咳痰、口干癥狀效果相當(dāng);(5)兩組中醫(yī)證候總積分比較,療后治療組中醫(yī)證候總積分為3.77?1.76,與對(duì)照組為7.09?1.92比較,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05),說明治療組在緩解感染后咳嗽中醫(yī)癥狀方面優(yōu)于對(duì)照組。(6)兩組咳嗽起效時(shí)間比較,治療組咳嗽平均起效時(shí)間為30.40?9.20h,對(duì)照組為32.80?10.42h,差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05),說明兩組咳嗽起效時(shí)間相當(dāng)。(7)兩組疾病療程比較,治療組疾病平均療程為4.95?0.92天,對(duì)照組為5.57?1.05天,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05),說明在疾病療程上,治療組短于對(duì)照組。結(jié)論:疏風(fēng)清熱止咳方在治療感染后咳嗽風(fēng)熱郁肺證具有良好臨床療效,且可縮短疾病療程,未見明顯不良反應(yīng)。
[Abstract]:Objective: to observe the clinical effect of Shufeng Qingfei Zhike recipe in treating cough wind heat depression lung syndrome after infection, and to evaluate its safety and effectiveness. Methods: sixty patients with post-infection cough were randomly divided into treatment group (n = 30) and control group (n = 30). The treatment group was treated with Shufeng Qingfei Zhike decoction. The control group was treated with compound methoxylamine capsule combined with vitamin C tablet orally for 7 days. The clinical efficacy was evaluated by observing the visual analogue score (VAS), the quantitative score of TCM syndromes, the onset time of cough and the total course of treatment before and after treatment. Results: (1) the total effective rate of the treatment group was 93.33% compared with the control group (70%), the difference was statistically significant (P0.05), which indicated that the total effective rate of the treatment group was higher than that of the control group. (2) the visual analogue score of the two groups was higher than that of the control group. After treatment, the visual analogue score of the treatment group was 2.57 ~ 1.89, while that of the control group was 3.76 ~ 2.07, the difference was statistically significant (P0.05), which indicated that the treatment group was superior to the control group in relieving cough symptoms. (3) the main symptom scores of the two groups were compared. After treatment, the score of main symptom in the treatment group was 3.20 鹵2.07, and that in the control group was 5.91 鹵3.18, the difference was statistically significant (P0.05), which indicated that the treatment group was superior to the control group in improving the main symptom. (4) the score of the two groups was higher than that of the control group. The treatment group was superior to the control group (P0.05), indicating that the treatment group was more effective in relieving the symptoms of dry pharynx and dry stool; after treatment, there was no significant difference between the two groups in the score of expectoration and dry oral symptoms (P0.05), which indicated that the two groups had no significant difference in relieving expectoration. (5) the total score of TCM syndromes in the treatment group was 3.77 ~ 1.76, and that in the control group was 7.09 ~ 1.92, compared with that in the control group, (5) the total score of TCM syndromes in the treatment group was 3.77 ~ 1.76 and 7.09 ~ 1.92 respectively. The difference was statistically significant (P0.05), indicating that the treatment group was superior to the control group in relieving the symptoms of cough after infection. (6) the time of onset of cough in the two groups was higher than that in the control group. The average onset time of cough in the treatment group was 30.40 鹵9.20 h, and that in the control group was 32.80 鹵10.42 h. The difference was not statistically significant (P0.05), which indicated that the onset time of cough was the same between the two groups. (7) the average course of treatment was 4.95 鹵0.92 days in the treatment group and 5.57 鹵1.05 days in the control group. The difference was statistically significant (P0.05), indicating that the treatment group was shorter than the control group in the course of treatment. Conclusion: Shufeng Qingre Zhike prescription has good clinical effect in treating cough with wind-heat depression and lung syndrome after infection and can shorten the course of disease without obvious adverse reactions.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湖南中醫(yī)藥大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2016
【分類號(hào)】：R256.11

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 高和德;;我國(guó)現(xiàn)代國(guó)民飲食特點(diǎn)對(duì)人體發(fā)病影響[J];實(shí)用中醫(yī)內(nèi)科雜志;2014年02期

2 陳麗娟;蔣文鈞;程勝軍;;麻牛止嗽顆粒治療感染后咳嗽的臨床研究[J];中國(guó)中醫(yī)急癥;2013年12期

3 鄭愛軍;;宣肺疏風(fēng)解痙法治療感染后咳嗽臨床觀察[J];中國(guó)中醫(yī)急癥;2013年11期

4 蔣美琴;陳燕;;穴位按摩配合中藥熏蒸在感染后咳嗽患者中的運(yùn)用[J];護(hù)理學(xué)報(bào);2013年12期

5 郭永生;;止嗽散治療上呼吸道感染后咳嗽的臨床療效觀察[J];光明中醫(yī);2013年05期

6 李康;秦曉華;;金沸草散加減治療感染后咳嗽的臨床觀察[J];遼寧中醫(yī)雜志;2013年05期

7 錢銳;韋袞政;李東鴿;明溪;王海月;;加減柴胡枳桔湯治療感染后咳嗽67例[J];中國(guó)中醫(yī)藥信息雜志;2013年04期

8 黃世香;;止嗽散顆粒治療感染后咳嗽30例[J];中國(guó)中醫(yī)藥現(xiàn)代遠(yuǎn)程教育;2011年17期

9 張明發(fā);沈雅琴;;甘草及其活性成分抗炎與抗炎機(jī)制的研究進(jìn)展[J];現(xiàn)代藥物與臨床;2011年04期

10 李軼雯;韓忠明;李岳樺;王少江;韓梅;;防風(fēng)的中藥學(xué)研究[J];特產(chǎn)研究;2011年02期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 閻s，

本文編號(hào)：2096933