CAJ | 학술논문

目的：对后半规管良性阵发性位置性眩晕(责燥泽贼藻则蚤燥则泽藻皂蚤糟蚤则糟怎造葬则糟葬灶葬造遭藻灶蚤早灶责葬则燥曾赠泽皂葬造责燥泽蚤贼蚤燥灶葬造增藻则贼蚤早燥，孕杂悦-月孕孕灾)复位方法(杂藻皂燥灶贼复位法和耘责造藻赠复位法)的临床疗效进行对照研究，探讨两种复位方法之间有无差别。方法将珠海市人民医院耳鼻喉科眩晕门诊自2012年1月至2013年6月收治的118例孕杂悦-月孕孕灾患者随机分为两组，每组各56例，分别行杂藻皂燥灶贼复位法和耘责造藻赠复位法，比较两组的治疗效果。结果1周后：杂藻皂燥灶贼复位法的成功率为71.4豫(40/56)，而耘责造藻赠复位法的成功率为85.7豫(48/56)；第2周：杂藻皂燥灶贼复位法的成功率为82.1豫(46/56)，而耘责造藻赠复位法的成功率为89.3豫(50/56)；第3周：杂藻皂燥灶贼复位法的成功率为89.3豫(50/56)，耘责造藻赠复位法的成功率91.1豫(51/56)；第4周：杂藻皂燥灶贼复位法的成功率为96.4豫(54/56)，复发1例，无效1例，无效的1例改用耘责造藻赠法亦无效；耘责造藻赠复位法的成功率为92.9豫(52/56)，复发2例，无效2例，无效的2例改用杂藻皂燥灶贼法亦无效。经过统计分析，两种方法随访各时间段的成功率比较均无统计学差异(孕>0.05)。结论杂藻皂燥灶贼复位法和耘责造藻赠复位法均有良好的效果，两者之间不存在统计学差异，临床可以根据医生的习惯和患者的情况自由作出选择。
목적：대후반규관량성진발성위치성현훈(책조택적조칙조조칙택조조조조조칙조즘조장칙조장조장조조조조조조조책장칙조증증택조장조책조택조적조조조장조증조칙적조조조，잉잡열-월잉잉재)복위방법(잡조조조조적복위법화운책조조증복위법)적림상료효진행대조연구，탐토량충복위방법지간유무차별。방법장주해시인민의원이비후과현훈문진자2012년1월지2013년6월수치적118례잉잡열-월잉잉재환자수궤분위량조，매조각56례，분별행잡조조조조적복위법화운책조조증복위법，비교량조적치료효과。결과1주후：잡조조조조적복위법적성공솔위71.4예(40/56)，이운책조조증복위법적성공솔위85.7예(48/56)；제2주：잡조조조조적복위법적성공솔위82.1예(46/56)，이운책조조증복위법적성공솔위89.3예(50/56)；제3주：잡조조조조적복위법적성공솔위89.3예(50/56)，운책조조증복위법적성공솔91.1예(51/56)；제4주：잡조조조조적복위법적성공솔위96.4예(54/56)，복발1례，무효1례，무효적1례개용운책조조증법역무효；운책조조증복위법적성공솔위92.9예(52/56)，복발2례，무효2례，무효적2례개용잡조조조조적법역무효。경과통계분석，량충방법수방각시간단적성공솔비교균무통계학차이(잉>0.05)。결론잡조조조조적복위법화운책조조증복위법균유량호적효과，량자지간불존재통계학차이，림상가이근거의생적습관화환자적정황자유작출선택。
Objective To evaluate the difference between two kinds of maneuvers (Semont maneuver and Epley maneuver) for the treatment of posterior semicircular canal benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (PSC-BPPV). Methods 118 patients with PSC-BPPV from January 2012 to June 2013 in Zhuhai people's hospital were randomly divided into two groups, treated with Semont maneuver and Epley maneuver respectively, with 56 patients in each group. The therapeutic effects of the two groups were compared. Results After one week, the success rate was 71.4%(40/56) of Semont, and 85.7%(48/56) of Epley;At 2nd week, the success rate was 82.1%(46/56) of Semont, and 89.3%(50/56) of Epley;At 3rd week, the success rate was 89.3%(50/56) of Semont, and 91.1%(51/56) of Epley;At 4th week, the success rate of Semont was 96.4%(54/56), with one case of recurrence, one case of invalid (changed to Epley also uselessness);the success rate of Epley was 92.9%(52/56), with 2 cases of recurrence, 2 cases of invalid (changed to Semont still uselessness). Statistical analysis showed no statistical difference between two maneuvers at each period of follow-up (P >0.05). Conclusions Both Semont maneuver and Epley maneuver have good effect, with no statistical difference between two maneuvers. Doctors can freely make choice according their habits and patients' situation.