皮内针调理肝肺法治疗慢性难治性咳嗽的临床效果

摘要
图/表
参考文献(26)
相关文章 (0)

全文: PDF (746 KB) HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要目的研究皮内针调理肝肺法治疗慢性难治性咳嗽的临床效果。方法根据Excel生成随机数字表，采用随机、对照、单盲的方法将2015年6月—2016年3月中国中医科学院广安门医院门诊诊断为肝火犯肺型慢性难治性咳嗽24例患者分为治疗组和对照组，每组各12例。两组均予以基础治疗，在此基础上，治疗组给予皮内针治疗，对照组给予真穴安慰针治疗。治疗4周及治疗结束4周随访1次。以咳嗽症状积分、莱切斯特咳嗽量表（LCQ）和咳嗽视觉模拟评分（VAS）得分作为主要评估指标。结果研究过程中对照组脱落3例，失访2例，出差1例，剩余9例。咳嗽症状积分：日间咳嗽时间点比较差异、交互作用差异均有统计学意义（均P ＜ 0.05），组间比较差异无统计学意义（P ＞ 0.05）。夜间咳嗽评分时间点比较差异有统计学意义（均P ＜ 0.05），组间比较及交互作用差异均无统计学意义（均P ＞ 0.05）。组内比较：治疗4周后、疗程结束后4周，治疗组日间咳嗽积分和夜间咳嗽积分均较治疗前降低，对照组夜间咳嗽积分较治疗前降低（均P ＜ 0.05）。VAS评分：咳嗽程度、咳嗽频率评分组间比较、时间点比较差异均有统计学意义（均P ＜ 0.05），交互作用差异无统计学意义（P ＞ 0.05）。夜间咳嗽评分时间点比较差异有统计学意义（均P ＜ 0.05），组间比较及交互作用差异均无统计学意义（均P ＞ 0.05）。组内比较：治疗4周后、疗程结束后4周，两组的咳嗽程度、咳嗽频率和夜间咳嗽评分均较治疗前降低（均P ＜ 0.05）。组间比较：治疗4周后、疗程结束后4周，治疗组的咳嗽程度、咳嗽频率评分均低于对照组（均P ＜ 0.05）。LCQ评分：生理部分、心理部分、社会部分评分时间点比较差异有统计学意义（均P ＜ 0.05），组间比较及交互作用差异均无统计学意义（均P ＞ 0.05）。总分的组间比较、时间点比较、交互作用差异均无统计学意义（均P ＞ 0.05）。组内比较：治疗4周后、疗程结束后4周，治疗组生理部分、心理部分、社会部分评分均高于治疗前，差异均有统计学意义（均P ＜ 0.05），疗程结束后4周，对照组心理部分、社会部分评分均高于治疗前，差异均有统计学意义（均P ＜ 0.05）。结论皮内针治疗慢性难治性咳嗽安全有效。治疗效果主要体现在减轻咳嗽的严重程度及减少咳嗽的频率方面。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	刘志国1
	2 李海霞3 王蕾1 边永君1 李光熙1 李国勤1 荣毅1 亢秀红4

关键词 ：皮内针, 难治性咳嗽, 咳嗽视觉模拟量表, 莱切斯特咳嗽量表, 咳嗽症状积分

Abstract：Objective To study the clinical effect of treating chronic refractory cough with intradermal needle regulating liver and lung. Methods According to Excel, a random number table was generated, and the 24 patients diagnosed as liver fire invading lung type chronic refractory cough in the outpatient clinic of Guang′anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences from June 2015 to March 2016 were divided into treatment group and control group by random, controlled and single blind method, with 12 cases in each group. Both groups were given basic treatment, on this basis, the treatment group was given intradermal needle treatment, and the control group was given true acupoint comfort needle treatment. Treatment was performed for four weeks, and one follow-up was performed after four weeks of treatment. Cough symptom score, Leicester cough questionnaire (LCQ) and cough visual analogue scale (VAS) scores were used as the main evaluation indicators. Results During the study, three cases of abscission, two cases of loss of follow-up, one case of business trip and the remaining nine cases were in the control group. Cough symptom scores: there were statistically significant differences in the time points and the interaction of daytime cough between the two groups (all P ＜ 0.05), but no statistically significant differences between the two groups (P ＞ 0.05). The differences of night cough score at time points were statistically significant (all P ＜ 0.05), while the differences between the two groups and interaction were not statistically significant (all P ＞ 0.05). Intra-group comparison: after four weeks of treatment and four weeks after the end of the treatment course, the scores of daytime cough and night cough in the treatment group were all lower than those before treatment, and the scores of night cough in the control group were lower than those before treatment (all P ＜ 0.05). VAS score: there were statistically significant differences in the scores of cough degree and cough frequency between groups and at time points (all P ＜ 0.05), but no statistically significant difference in the interaction (P ＞ 0.05). The differences of night cough score at time point were statistically significant (all P ＜ 0.05), while the differences between the two groups and interaction were not statistically significant (all P ＞ 0.05). Intra-group comparison: after four weeks of treatment and four weeks after the end of treatment course, cough degree, cough frequency and night cough score of the two groups were all lower than those before treatment (all P ＜ 0.05). Comparison between groups: after four weeks of treatment and four weeks after the end of treatment course, the scores of cough degree and cough frequency in the treatment group were lower than those in the control group (all P ＜ 0.05). LCQ scores: there were statistically significant differences in the time points of the physiological, psychological and social part scores (P ＜ 0.05), while the differences between the two groups and interaction were not statistically significant (all P ＞ 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups, time points and interaction in the total score (all P ＞ 0.05). Intra-group comparison: after four weeks of treatment and four weeks after the end of treatment course, the treatment group physical parts, psychological part, social part scores were higher than those before treatment, the differences were statistically significant (all P ＜ 0.05), four weeks after the end of treatment course, the control group psychological part, social part scores were higher than those before treatment, the differences were statistically significant (all P ＜ 0.05). Conclusion Intradermal needle is safe and effective in treating chronic refractory cough. The therapeutic effect is mainly reflected in reducing the severity and frequency of cough.

Key words： Intradermal needle Refractory cough Cough visual analogue scale Leicester cough questionnaire Cough symptom score

基金资助:中国中医科学院广安门医院国家中医临床研究示范基地科研专项暨所级科研基金课题（2014S282）。

通讯作者: ▲通讯作者

引用本文:

刘志国1,2 李海霞3 王蕾1 边永君1 李光熙1 李国勤1 荣毅1 亢秀红4. 皮内针调理肝肺法治疗慢性难治性咳嗽的临床效果[J]. 中国医药导报, 2020, 17(30): 173-177.
LIU Zhiguo1,2 LI Haixia3 WANG Lei1 BIAN Yongjun1 LI Guangxi1 LI Guoqin1 RONG Yi1 KANG Xiuhong4▲. Clinical effect of treating chronic refractory cough with intradermal needle regulating liver and lung. 中国医药导报, 2020, 17(30): 173-177.

链接本文:

http://www.yiyaodaobao.com.cn/CN/ 或 http://www.yiyaodaobao.com.cn/CN/Y2020/V17/I30/173

[1] 余莉，陈强，邱忠民.难治性咳嗽的诊治[J].中华结核和呼吸杂志，2016，39（5）：383-386.
[2] Irwin RS，Madison JM. Anatomical diagnostic protocol in evaluating chronic cough with specific reference to gastroesophageal reflux disease [J]. Am J Med，2000，108（Suppl 4a）：126S-130S.
[3] Chung KF，Pavord ID. Prevalence，pathogenesis，and causes of chronic cough [J]. Lancet，2008，371（9621）：1364-1374.
[4] He L，Li B，Chen Y，et al. Diagnosis and treatment of chronic cough in the elderly [J]. Guide of China Medicine，2012， 10：47-49.
[5] Iyer VN，Lim KG. Chronic cough：an update [J]. Mayo Clin Proc，2013，88（10）：1115-1126.
[6] Chung KF. Approach to chronic cough：the neuropathic basis for cough hypersensitivity syndrome [J]. J Thorac Dis，2014，6（Suppl 7）：S699-707.
[7] Haque RA，Usmani OS，Barnes PJ. Chronic idiopathic cough： a discrete clinical entity [J]. Chest，2005，127（5）： 1710-1713.
[8] Randel A. ACCP Releases Guideline for the Treatment of Unexplained Chronic Cough [J]. Am Fam Physician，2016，93（11）：950.
[9] 顾永丽，温燕，孙增先，等.特异性神经调节剂用于治疗难治性慢性咳嗽的研究进展[J].中华结核和呼吸杂志，2020，43（5）：460-463.
[10] Vertigan AE，Theodoros DG，Gibson PG，et al. Efficacy of speech pathology management for chronic cough：a randomised placebo controlled trial of treatment efficacy [J]. Thorax，2006，61（12）：1065-1069.
[11] Chamberlain S，Garrod R，Birring SS. Cough suppression therapy: does it work? [J]. Pulm Pharmacol Ther，2013， 26（5）： 524-527.
[12] Murry T，Branski RC，Yu K，et al. Laryngeal sensory deficits in patients with chronic cough and paradoxical vocal fold movement disorder [J]. Laryngoscope，2010，120（8）：1576-1581.
[13] Jiang C，Jiang L，Qin Q. Conventional Treatments plus Acupuncture for Asthma in Adults and Adolescent：A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis [J]. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med，2019，2019：9580670.
[14] Yu M，Gao L，Kong Y，et al. Safety and efficacy of acupuncture for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease： A systematic review protocol [J]. Medicine （Baltimore），2019，98（37）：e17112.
[15] Li W，Yin P，Lao L，et al. Effectiveness of Acupuncture Used for the Management of Postpartum Depression：A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis [J]. Biomed Res Int，2019，2019：6597503.
[16] 陈金凤，张文竹，王靖轩，等.针刺自主神经相应区域治疗慢性咳嗽[J].长春中医药大学学报，2018，34（5）：919-922.
[17] 蒙剑华，李志明，刘梅英.皮内针联合中药治疗面肌痉挛的临床疗效观察[J].当代医学，2020，26（29）：5-7.
[18] 中华医学会呼吸病学分会哮喘学组.咳嗽的诊断与治疗指南[J].中华结核和呼吸杂志，2016，39（5）：323-354.
[19] 中华中医药学会内科分会肺系病专业委员会.咳嗽中医诊疗专家共识意见（2011版）[J].中医杂志，2011，52（10）：896-899.
[20] Hsu JY，Stone RA，Logan-Sinclair RB，et al. Coughing frequency in patients with persistent cough： assessment using a 24 hour ambulatory recorder [J]. Eur Respir J，1994，7（7）：1246-1253.
[21] Fukumitsu K，Kanemitsu Y，Asano T，et al. Tiotropium Attenuates Refractory Cough and Capsaicin Cough Reflex Sensitivity in Patients with Asthma [J]. J Allergy Clin Immunol，2018，In practice 6：1613-1620.
[22] Birring SS，Prudon B，Carr AJ，et al. Development of a symptom specific health status measure for patients with chronic cough： Leicester Cough Questionnaire （LCQ） [J]. Thorax，2003，58（4）：339-343.
[23] Morice AH，Jakes AD，Faruqi S，et al. A worldwide survey of chronic cough：a manifestation of enhanced somatosensory response [J]. Eur Respir J，2014，44（5）：1149-1155.
[24] Everett CF，Kastelik JA，Thompson RH，et al. Chronic persistent cough in the community：a questionnaire survey [J]. Cough，2007，3：5.
[25] 杨存珍，陈如冲，李斌恺，等.女性慢性咳嗽患者生活质量及尿失禁调查[J].中华哮喘杂志：电子版，2010，4（4）：252-255.
[26] 宗岩.从肝论治女性更年期咳嗽变异性哮喘54例[J].江苏中医药，2014（8）：42-43.