论文部分内容阅读
目的探讨硝苯地平与氨氯地平治疗原发性高血压的临床效果并进行比较。方法方法选取从2014年8月~2015年8月在我院接受治疗的原发性高血压患者60例,随机分成两组,其中30例为X组采用按时口服硝苯地平片治疗;其余30例为A组,采用按时口服氨氯地平治疗。观察两组患者的治疗效果并记录治疗期间出现的不良反应。结果 A组效果显著的有22例,效果良好的有7例,总有效率为96.67%,X组效果显著的有17例,效果良好的有6例,总有效率为76.67%;A组的治疗总有效率明显高于X组。X组与A组均出现了不同程度的不良反应。其中X组出现6例,不良反应率为20.00%,A组出现3例,不良反应率为10.00%,A组不良反应率明显低于X组。P<0.05,两组差异均具有统计学意义。结论论氨氯地平总体降压效果显著,治疗过程中不良反应发生相对较少,在患者选择长期、稳定降压药时是值得推荐应用的。
Objective To investigate the clinical effects of nifedipine and amlodipine in the treatment of essential hypertension. Methods Methods Sixty patients with essential hypertension who were treated in our hospital from August 2014 to August 2015 were randomly divided into two groups, of which 30 patients were treated with oral nifedipine tablets in group X. The remaining 30 Cases for the A group, the use of oral administration of amlodipine treatment. The therapeutic effects of both groups were observed and the adverse reactions observed during treatment were recorded. Results In group A, there were 22 cases with remarkable effect, 7 cases with good effect, the total effective rate was 96.67%, 17 cases with significant effect in X group, 6 cases with good effect and the total effective rate was 76.67% The total effective rate was significantly higher than the X group. X group and A group appeared different degrees of adverse reactions. There were 6 cases in group X with adverse reaction rate of 20.00%, 3 cases in group A and 10.00% in adverse reactions. The adverse reaction rate in group A was significantly lower than that in group X P <0.05, the difference between the two groups was statistically significant. Conclusions The overall antihypertensive effect of amlodipine is significant, with relatively few adverse reactions during the course of treatment, and it is recommended for patients to choose long-term and stable antihypertensive drugs.