CAJ | 학술논문

目的：观察耳穴贴压治疗肛门病术后疼痛的疗效及安全性。方法收集2009年1月至2012年12月本院肛肠科肛门病术后疼痛患者118例，按随机数字表法分主穴组26例、配穴一组20例、配穴二组22例、配穴三组27例、镇痛剂组23例。耳穴贴压主穴组予以耳穴贴压镇痛，主穴：神门、病变部位对应敏感点（痔核点）；配穴一组在主穴基础上配合皮质下、内分泌、交感；配穴二组在主穴基础上配合大肠、直肠下段、肛门；配穴三组在主穴基础上，加交感、皮质下、肛门；镇痛剂组口服意施叮片。5组均治疗30 min后，分析其临床镇痛疗效及安全性。结果耳穴贴压主穴组、配穴一组、配穴二组、配穴三组、镇痛剂组在镇痛后10 min，积分减少率分别为（6.49±1.98）%、（5.90±1.52）%、（6.10±2.22）%、（6.64±2.25）%、（7.61±1.10）%；与镇痛剂组比较，耳穴贴压主穴组、配穴一组、配穴二组的镇痛效果明显（P＜0.05）；镇痛后30 min积分减少率分别为（0.45±0.23）%、（0.43±0.18）%、（0.42±0.19）%、（0.38±0.25）%、（0.38±0.23）%，与镇痛剂组比较，差异均无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。结论耳穴贴压治疗肛门病术后疼痛在治疗10 min后效果显著优于镇痛剂组；治疗30 min后与镇痛剂组疗效相当。
목적：관찰이혈첩압치료항문병술후동통적료효급안전성。방법수집2009년1월지2012년12월본원항장과항문병술후동통환자118례，안수궤수자표법분주혈조26례、배혈일조20례、배혈이조22례、배혈삼조27례、진통제조23례。이혈첩압주혈조여이이혈첩압진통，주혈：신문、병변부위대응민감점（치핵점）；배혈일조재주혈기출상배합피질하、내분비、교감；배혈이조재주혈기출상배합대장、직장하단、항문；배혈삼조재주혈기출상，가교감、피질하、항문；진통제조구복의시정편。5조균치료30 min후，분석기림상진통료효급안전성。결과이혈첩압주혈조、배혈일조、배혈이조、배혈삼조、진통제조재진통후10 min，적분감소솔분별위（6.49±1.98）%、（5.90±1.52）%、（6.10±2.22）%、（6.64±2.25）%、（7.61±1.10）%；여진통제조비교，이혈첩압주혈조、배혈일조、배혈이조적진통효과명현（P＜0.05）；진통후30 min적분감소솔분별위（0.45±0.23）%、（0.43±0.18）%、（0.42±0.19）%、（0.38±0.25）%、（0.38±0.23）%，여진통제조비교，차이균무통계학의의（P＞0.05）。결론이혈첩압치료항문병술후동통재치료10 min후효과현저우우진통제조；치료30 min후여진통제조료효상당。
Objective To observe the efficacy and safety of the treatment on postoperative pain of anal disease by ear-point taping and pressuring. Methods Using random number table method,118 patients with postoperative pain of anal diseases were divided into 5 groups, namely 26 cases of analgesia group treated by main ear-point, 20 cases of group one treated by analgesia compatibility ear-point, 22 cases of group two treated by analgesia compatibility ear-point, 27 patients of group three treated by analgesia compatibility ear-point, and 23 patients of control group. The main ear-point for analgesia included TF(4) and the sensitive point matching with diseased area;Based on the main ear-point, compatibility ear-point group one add to AT(4)、CO(18)、AH(6a);compatibility ear-point group two add to CO(7)、HX(2)、HX(5);compatibility ear-point group three add to AH(6a)、AT(4)、HX(5);and the control group was treated with oral indomethacin tablets. All five groups were treated for 30 min, and the clinical analgesic efficacy and safety were evaluated. Results Pain scores decreased rates of the main ear-point analgesia group, compatibility ear-point analgesia group one, compatibility ear-point analgesia group two, compatibility ear-point analgesia group three, and the control analgesia group at 10 min after treatment was (6.49±1.98)%, (5.90±1.52)%, (6.10±2.22)%, (6.64±2.25)%, and (7.61± 1.10)%respectively. Compared with the control group , the main ear-point analgesia group or the compatibility ear-point analgesia group one or the compatibility ear-point analgesia group two, the difference was significant (P<0.05) . At 30 min after treatment, integral reduce pain rate of the above groups was (0.45±0.23)%, (0.43±0.18)%, (0.42±0.19)%, (0.38±0.25)%, and (0.38±0.23)%, the difference was not statistically significant between the control group and the other four groups (P>0.05). Conclusion The effects of 10 min treatment of ear-point taping and pressuring treating postoperative pain of anal disease was significantly better than the control group,however the 30 min treatment did not show significant difference.