CAJ | 학술논문

目的：通过观察中药鼻喷剂与西药鼻喷剂对于治疗过敏性鼻炎的疗效比较，探讨中药鼻喷剂的临床应用价值。方法：选取过敏性鼻炎患者共31例，采用单盲试验，用外观相同的喷罐分别装入中药鼻喷剂及西药鼻喷剂，给予受试者，嘱咐受试者固定一个鼻孔喷中药液，另一个鼻孔喷西药液，每天3次。1周回诊检查1次，实验时间共计两周。检查方法分两部分：鼻腔摄影记录，填写疗效评估表。结果：本次观察病例共31例，有3例失联或中途放弃，共实际观察28例。中药喷剂疗效优于西药喷剂供16例，占57％。中药喷剂疗效等同西药喷剂共7例，占25％。中药喷剂疗效劣于西药喷剂共2例，占7％。中药喷剂无效者共3例，占11％。西药有11例无效，占39％。鼻腔摄影显示中药喷剂经两周持续使用后，无1例出现不良反应。结论：中药鼻喷剂治疗过敏性鼻炎疗效确切，而且无不良反应出现，具有良好的临床应用价值。
목적：통과관찰중약비분제여서약비분제대우치료과민성비염적료효비교，탐토중약비분제적림상응용개치。방법：선취과민성비염환자공31례，채용단맹시험，용외관상동적분관분별장입중약비분제급서약비분제，급여수시자，촉부수시자고정일개비공분중약액，령일개비공분서약액，매천3차。1주회진검사1차，실험시간공계량주。검사방법분량부분：비강섭영기록，전사료효평고표。결과：본차관찰병례공31례，유3례실련혹중도방기，공실제관찰28례。중약분제료효우우서약분제공16례，점57％。중약분제료효등동서약분제공7례，점25％。중약분제료효렬우서약분제공2례，점7％。중약분제무효자공3례，점11％。서약유11례무효，점39％。비강섭영현시중약분제경량주지속사용후，무1례출현불량반응。결론：중약비분제치료과민성비염료효학절，이차무불량반응출현，구유량호적림상응용개치。
Objective:To compare the treatment effect between Levocabsitine and Shubi Spray for the allergic rhinitis , and investigate the clinical application value of TCM nasal spray .Methods:Thirty-one patients were participated in the single-blind study, each patient was given one bottle of Shubi Spray and one bottle of Levocabsitine , each was used for one nasal cavity , 3 times a day, 2 weeks.At end of each week we used micro-camera to observe the nasal mucosa .Results:3 patients lost to follow up or withdrew the study prematurely , 28 patients completed the study .16 patients reported superior efficacy of Shubi Spray to Levocabistine (57%).7 patients reported no sig-nificant difference of Shubi Spray and Levocabistine (25%).2 patients reported inferior efficacy of Shubi Spray to Levocabistine (7%). 3 patients felt the Shubi Spray have no effect (11%), compared to 11 patients who felt levocabstine have no effect (39%).No adverse reaction was observed or reported .Conclusion:The Shubi Spray was effective for relieving clinical symptoms of allergic rhinitis , and its safety was assured , therefore it has good clinical application prospect .