论文部分内容阅读
目的:观察并探讨用痰热清注射液治疗社区获得性肺炎的临床效果及安全性。方法:对2009年5月～2012年3月期间我院收治的150例社区获得性肺炎患者的临床资料进行回顾性研究。我们采用随机数字表法将这150例患者分为对照组和治疗组,每组各有75例患者。其中,对照组患者进行祛痰治疗(每天服用50mg的氨溴索)、抗感染治疗(每天服用500mg的阿奇霉素)和营养支持治疗等西医常规治疗。治疗组患者在进行西医常规治疗(方法与对照组患者相同)的基础上,加用痰热清注射液进行治疗(每天注射1次,每次注射20ml)。两周后,比较两组患者治疗的有效率、咳嗽、咳痰、发热等临床症状的缓解时间和积分情况,同时对两组患者不良反应的发生情况及其治疗前后血液中白细胞、中性粒细胞和C反应蛋白的水平进行比较分析。结果:对照组患者与治疗组患者治疗的总有效率分别为86.7%和94.7%。治疗组患者治疗的总有效率明显高于对照组患者,二者相比差异具有显著性(p<0.05)。治疗组患者咳嗽、咳痰及发热等症状缓解的时间均少于对照组患者,二者相比差异具有显著性(p<0.05)。两组患者治疗后临床症状的积分情况较治疗前均有明显下降,而且治疗组患者治疗后的临床症状积分明显低于对照组患者,二者相比较差异具有显著性(p<0.05)。两组患者治疗后血液中的白细胞和中性粒细胞水平较治疗前均有明显的下降,而且治疗组患者治疗后血液中白细胞和中性粒细胞的水平明显低于对照组患者,二者相比差异具有显著性(p<0.05)。不过,两组患者治疗前后的C反应蛋白水平无显著性差异。同时,两组患者在治疗过程中均未发生严重的不良反应。结论:用痰热清注射液治疗社区获得性肺炎具有很好的疗效,可以有效地改善患者的临床症状,缩短其病程,降低其血液中白细胞及中性粒细胞的水平,而且不会引起严重的不良反应,故值得在临床上推广使用。
Objective: To observe and discuss the clinical effect and safety of Tanreqing injection in the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia. Methods: The clinical data of 150 patients with community-acquired pneumonia admitted in our hospital from May 2009 to March 2012 were retrospectively studied. We used random number table method these 150 patients were divided into control group and treatment group, each group has 75 patients. Among them, patients in the control group received expectorant treatment (50 mg of ambroxol daily), anti-infective therapy (azithromycin 500 mg per day), and conventional western medicine such as nutritional support. The patients in the treatment group were treated with Tanreqing Injection (once a day, 20ml each time) on the basis of western medicine conventional treatment (the same method as the control group). Two weeks later, the effective rate of treatment, cough, sputum, fever and other clinical symptoms of the two groups were compared, and the incidence of adverse reactions and the incidence of adverse reactions in both groups before and after treatment of leukocytes, neutrophils Cell and C-reactive protein levels were analyzed comparatively. Results: The total effective rate of treatment in control group and treatment group were 86.7% and 94.7% respectively. The total effective rate of the treatment group was significantly higher than that of the control group, the difference was significant (p <0.05). Patients in the treatment group had less time to relieve symptoms such as cough, sputum and fever compared with those in the control group. The difference was significant (p <0.05). The scores of clinical symptoms in both groups were significantly decreased after treatment, and the scores of clinical symptoms in the treatment group were significantly lower than those in the control group after treatment (P <0.05). After treatment, the levels of leukocytes and neutrophils in the blood of the two groups were significantly lower than those before treatment, and the levels of leukocytes and neutrophils in the blood after treatment in the treatment group were significantly lower than those in the control group The difference was significant (p <0.05). However, there was no significant difference in C-reactive protein levels between the two groups before and after treatment. At the same time, two groups of patients in the course of treatment did not occur serious adverse reactions. Conclusion: Tanreqing injection in the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia has a good effect, which can effectively improve the patient’s clinical symptoms, shorten the course of the disease, reduce the level of leukocytes and neutrophils in the blood, and will not cause serious Of the adverse reactions, it is worth promoting the clinical use.