| 吴海波.常规治疗联合氟哌噻吨美利曲辛片治疗非糜烂性反流性食管炎的疗效和安全性评价[J].安徽医药,2018,22(5):947-950. |
| 常规治疗联合氟哌噻吨美利曲辛片治疗非糜烂性反流性食管炎的疗效和安全性评价 |
| The curative effect and safety evaluation of conventional therapy combined with deanxit in the treatment of non-erosive reflux disease |
| 投稿时间：2017-07-12 |
| DOI： |
| 中文关键词: 氟哌噻吨美利曲辛 非糜烂性反流性食管炎 临床疗效和安全性 |
| 英文关键词: Deanxit non-erosive reflux disease curative effect and safety |
| 基金项目: |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 1843 |
| 全文下载次数: 693 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 目的 观察常规治疗联合氟哌噻吨美利曲辛片治疗非糜烂性反流性食管炎的临床疗效,并评价其安全性。 方法 选取80例非糜烂性反流性食管炎患者作为研究对象,按随机数字表法分为对照组和观察组各40例。对照组接受兰索拉唑片联合盐酸伊托必利分散片的常规治疗,观察组在对照组基础上增加氟哌噻吨美利曲辛片。比较分析两组治疗前后反流性疾病问卷评分(RDQ)、焦虑自评量表(SAS)和抑郁自评量表(SDS)评分,临床总有效率和不良反应发生情况。 结果 两组治疗前的反酸、反食、烧心和胸部不适的RDQ评分比较,均差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05)。两组治疗后的反酸、反食、烧心和胸部不适的RDQ评分均较治疗前低,均差异有统计学意义(P＜0.001)；且观察组的各项数值均明显少于对照组,差异有统计学意义(t=2.605,2.773,2.189,2.617,P＜0.05)。两组治疗前的SAS和SDS评分比较,均差异无统计学意义(t=0.072,0.083,P＞0.05)。两组治疗后的SAS和SDS均较治疗前低,均差异有统计学意义(t=4.609,7.285,3.142,5.256,P＜0.001)；且观察组的SAS(32.83±11.12)分和SDS(40.83±10.35)分均明显少于对照组[(39.91±10.40)、(45.76±10.41)分],差异有统计学意义(t=2.941,2.124,P＜0.05)。观察组的治疗总有效率90.00%明显高于对照组67.50%,差异有统计学意义(χ2=4.781,P=0.029)。两组不良反应发生率差异无统计学意义(χ2=0.114,P=0.735)。 结论 非糜烂性反流性食管炎患者在常规治疗基础上加用氟哌噻吨美利曲辛片可有效减轻反酸、反食、烧心和胸部不适感症状,并改善患者焦虑、抑郁的负面情绪,疗效确切,安全可靠,值得在临床上推广应用。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| Objective To observe the curative effect of conventional treatment combined with Deanxit in the treatment of non-erosive reflux disease,and to evaluate its safety. Methods Eighty cases of patients with non-erosive reflux disease were selected as the research objects in General Hospital of Coal-electricity Group in Suzhou and randomly assigned into control group and experimental group,each group having 40 cases.The control group received conventional treatment of Omeprazole Lansoprazole Tablets combined with Itopride Hydrochioride Dispersible Tablets while the experimental group received an additional Deanxit on the basis of the therapy in control group. Results The differences in RDQ scores of sour regurgitation,food regurgitation,heartburn and chest discomfort between the two groups before the treatment had no abut significance (P>0.05).But the RDQ scores of sour regurgitation,food regurgitation,heartburn and chest discomfort in two groups after the treatment were lower than before,with significant difference (P<0.001).And those data in experimental group were all lower than control group with significant difference (t=2.605,2.773,2.189,2.617,P<0.05).The differences in SAS and SDA scores between two groups before the treatment had no statistical significance (t=0.072,0.083,P>0.05).But the SAS and SDA scores in two groups after the treatment were lower than before with significant difference (t=4.609,7.285,3.142,5.256,P<0.001).SAS and SDS in the observation group were significantly lower [(32.83±11.12) points,(40.83±10.35) points] than in the control group [(39.91±10.40) points,(45.76±10.41) points],the difference was statistically significant (t=2.941,2.124,P<0.05).And the clinical efficacy rate of experimental group (90.00%) was obviously higher than that of the control group (67.50%) with significant difference (χ2=4.781,P=0.029).The incidence rates of the bloodline in two groups had no statistically significant difference (χ2=0.114,P=0.735).two groups before the treatment had no statistical significance (P＞0.05).But the RDQ scores of sour regurgitation,food regurgitation,heartburn and chest discomfort in two groups after the treatment were lower than before,with significant difference (P＜0.001).And those data in experimental group were all lower than control group with significant difference (t=2.605,2.773,2.189,2.617,P＜0.05).The differences in SAS and SDA scores between two groups before the treatment had no statistical significance (t=0.072,0.083,P＞0.05).But the SAS and SDA scores in two groups after the treatment were lower than before with significant difference (t=4.609,7.285,3.142,5.256,P＜0.001).And those data in experimental group were all lower than those in control group with significant difference (t=2.941,2.124,P＜0.05).And the clinical efficacy rate of experimental group(90.00%) was obviously higher than that of the control group(67.50%) with significant difference (χ2=4.781,P=0.029).The incidence rates of adverse reactions in two groups had no statistically significant difference (χ2=0.114,P=0.735). Conclusions Conventional treatment combined with Deanxit used in treating non-erosive reflux disease can effectivly alleviate the symptoms of sour regurgitation,food regurgitation,heartburn and chest discomfort,and improve patients′ anxious and depressive emotion.It has definite curative effect and reliable security,and is worth promoting in clinical practice. |
|
查看全文
查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
|
|
|
