河北医学
河北醫學
하북의학
HEBEI MEDICINE
2015年
1期
160-163
,共4页
李伟%徐翠萍%陈敏%方霞
李偉%徐翠萍%陳敏%方霞
리위%서취평%진민%방하
阿司匹林%尼莫地平%偏头痛
阿司匹林%尼莫地平%偏頭痛
아사필림%니막지평%편두통
Aspirin%Nimodipine%Migraine
目的：比较阿司匹林和尼莫地平用于治疗偏头痛的有效性和安全性。方法：选取2011年1月至2013年6月到我院就诊的偏头疼患者共324例随机分为两组，观察组采用阿司匹林治疗，对照组采用尼莫地平治疗，对治疗前后两组的偏头痛发作次数、持续时间、疼痛评分及有效率和并发症进行比较，并于治疗后3个月、6个月及一年随访两组的发作次数和复发率。结果：治疗前发作次数、持续时间和VAS评分的差异无统计学意义（ P＞0．05）；治疗后的发作次数、持续时间和VAS评分均显著降低，治疗组治疗后的发作次数、持续时间和 VAS 评分明显低于对照组，观察组的总有效率（96．91％）明显高于对照组（91．25％），并发症的发生率（3．66％）明显低于对照组（18．75％），以上差异均具有统计学意义（ P＜0．05）。结论：阿司匹林用于偏头痛治疗的安全性和有效性均优于尼莫地平，且长期效果较好，值得临床推广。
目的：比較阿司匹林和尼莫地平用于治療偏頭痛的有效性和安全性。方法：選取2011年1月至2013年6月到我院就診的偏頭疼患者共324例隨機分為兩組，觀察組採用阿司匹林治療，對照組採用尼莫地平治療，對治療前後兩組的偏頭痛髮作次數、持續時間、疼痛評分及有效率和併髮癥進行比較，併于治療後3箇月、6箇月及一年隨訪兩組的髮作次數和複髮率。結果：治療前髮作次數、持續時間和VAS評分的差異無統計學意義（ P＞0．05）；治療後的髮作次數、持續時間和VAS評分均顯著降低，治療組治療後的髮作次數、持續時間和 VAS 評分明顯低于對照組，觀察組的總有效率（96．91％）明顯高于對照組（91．25％），併髮癥的髮生率（3．66％）明顯低于對照組（18．75％），以上差異均具有統計學意義（ P＜0．05）。結論：阿司匹林用于偏頭痛治療的安全性和有效性均優于尼莫地平，且長期效果較好，值得臨床推廣。
목적：비교아사필림화니막지평용우치료편두통적유효성화안전성。방법：선취2011년1월지2013년6월도아원취진적편두동환자공324례수궤분위량조，관찰조채용아사필림치료，대조조채용니막지평치료，대치료전후량조적편두통발작차수、지속시간、동통평분급유효솔화병발증진행비교，병우치료후3개월、6개월급일년수방량조적발작차수화복발솔。결과：치료전발작차수、지속시간화VAS평분적차이무통계학의의（ P＞0．05）；치료후적발작차수、지속시간화VAS평분균현저강저，치료조치료후적발작차수、지속시간화 VAS 평분명현저우대조조，관찰조적총유효솔（96．91％）명현고우대조조（91．25％），병발증적발생솔（3．66％）명현저우대조조（18．75％），이상차이균구유통계학의의（ P＜0．05）。결론：아사필림용우편두통치료적안전성화유효성균우우니막지평，차장기효과교호，치득림상추엄。
Objective:To compare the efficacy and safety of aspirin and nimodipine in the treatment of migraine. Method:324 cases of migraine patients in our hospital from January 2011 to June 2013,were ran-domly divided into two groups, the observation group aspirin, the control group with nimodipine therapy. Compared the migraine frequency, duration, pain scores and the effectiveness and complications between the two groups before and after the treatment, followed-up the times of episodes and recurrence rates between the two groups at 3rd month, 6th months and one year after the treatment. Result:Differences in the frequency of episodes, duration and VAS scores were with no statistically significant (P>0. 05);the times of episodes, duration, and VAS scores after treatment were all significantly lower, and the number of episodes, duration and VAS score were significantly lower in the observation than the control group, the total efficiency of the observation group (96. 91%) was significantly higher than that in the contral group (91. 25%), the inci-dence of complications ( 3. 66%) was significantly lower than the control group ( 18. 75%), the differences were with statistically significant ( P <0. 05 ). Conclusion: The safety and effectiveness of aspirin in the treatment of migraine are better than that of nimodipine, and have better long-term effects. It’s worthy of clinical promotion.
