中国实用医药
中國實用醫藥
중국실용의약
CHINA PRACTICAL MEDICAL
2015年
5期
15-16
,共2页
清肺化痰方%西药%社区获得性肺炎%疗效观察
清肺化痰方%西藥%社區穫得性肺炎%療效觀察
청폐화담방%서약%사구획득성폐염%료효관찰
Clearing lung and eliminating phlegm prescription%Western medicine%Community-acquired pneumonia%Curative effect observation
目的：探析清肺化痰方联合西药治疗社区获得性肺炎的临床效果。方法160例诊断为社区获得性肺炎患者随机分为实验组80例和对照组80例。对照组采用西药治疗，实验组采用清肺化痰方联合西药治疗，比较两组患者的治疗效果、不良反应、临床症状消失时间情况。结果实验组治愈36例，显效26例，有效15例，无效3例，总有效率96.25%；对照组治愈22例，显效24例，有效16例，无效18例，总有效率77.50%；实验组总有效率高于对照组，两组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)；实验组临床症状消失时间均较对照组明显缩短(P<0.05)；实验组不良反应发生率明显低于对照组，两组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论清肺化痰方配合西药治疗社区获得性肺炎的临床效果较单独应用西药治疗佳，不良反应少，患者的满意度高，能够改善患者生存质量，值得临床进一步推广应用。
目的：探析清肺化痰方聯閤西藥治療社區穫得性肺炎的臨床效果。方法160例診斷為社區穫得性肺炎患者隨機分為實驗組80例和對照組80例。對照組採用西藥治療，實驗組採用清肺化痰方聯閤西藥治療，比較兩組患者的治療效果、不良反應、臨床癥狀消失時間情況。結果實驗組治愈36例，顯效26例，有效15例，無效3例，總有效率96.25%；對照組治愈22例，顯效24例，有效16例，無效18例，總有效率77.50%；實驗組總有效率高于對照組，兩組比較差異有統計學意義(P<0.05)；實驗組臨床癥狀消失時間均較對照組明顯縮短(P<0.05)；實驗組不良反應髮生率明顯低于對照組，兩組比較差異有統計學意義(P<0.05)。結論清肺化痰方配閤西藥治療社區穫得性肺炎的臨床效果較單獨應用西藥治療佳，不良反應少，患者的滿意度高，能夠改善患者生存質量，值得臨床進一步推廣應用。
목적：탐석청폐화담방연합서약치료사구획득성폐염적림상효과。방법160례진단위사구획득성폐염환자수궤분위실험조80례화대조조80례。대조조채용서약치료，실험조채용청폐화담방연합서약치료，비교량조환자적치료효과、불량반응、림상증상소실시간정황。결과실험조치유36례，현효26례，유효15례，무효3례，총유효솔96.25%；대조조치유22례，현효24례，유효16례，무효18례，총유효솔77.50%；실험조총유효솔고우대조조，량조비교차이유통계학의의(P<0.05)；실험조림상증상소실시간균교대조조명현축단(P<0.05)；실험조불량반응발생솔명현저우대조조，량조비교차이유통계학의의(P<0.05)。결론청폐화담방배합서약치료사구획득성폐염적림상효과교단독응용서약치료가，불량반응소，환자적만의도고，능구개선환자생존질량，치득림상진일보추엄응용。
Objective To explore the clinical effect of clearing lung and eliminating phlegm prescription combined with Western medicine in the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia. Methods A total of 160 patients with diagnosed community-acquired pneumonia were randomly divided into experimental group with 80 cases and control group with 80 cases. The control group received Western medicine for treatment, and the experimental group was treated by clearing lung and eliminating phlegm prescription combined with Western medicine. Comparisons were made on the curative effect, adverse reactions, and clinical symptoms disappearance time between the two groups. Results There were 36 cured cases, 26 cases with excellent effect, 15 effective cases, and 3 ineffective cases in the experimental group, and the total effective rate was 96.25%. There were 22 cured cases, 24 cases with excellent effect, 16 effective cases, and 18 ineffective cases in the control group, with the total effective rate as 77.50%. The total effective rate was higher in the experimental group than in the control group, and the difference had statistical significance between the two groups (P<0.05). The experimental group had obviously shorter clinical symptoms disappearance time than the control group (P<0.05), and the incidence of adverse reactions was lower in the experimental group than the control group. The difference between the two groups had statistical significance (P<0.05). Conclusion In the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia, the combination of clearing lung and eliminating phlegm prescription and Western medicine has better clinical effect than Western medicine treatment alone. This method also has few adverse reactions and high patient satisfaction. It can improve patients’life quality, and is worthy of further promotion and application in clinic.
