Chinese General Practice ›› 2023, Vol. 26 ›› Issue (08): 955-962.DOI: 10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2022.0545
• Original Research • Previous Articles Next Articles
Received:
2022-07-13
Revised:
2022-10-19
Published:
2023-03-15
Online:
2022-10-31
Contact:
GAO Jihua
通讯作者:
高记华
作者简介:
基金资助:
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: https://www.chinagp.net/EN/10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2022.0545
组别 | 例数 | 性别〔n(%)〕 | 年龄〔M(P25,P75),岁〕 | 混合痔病程〔n(%)〕 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
男 | 女 | <6个月 | 6~12个月 | >12个月 | ||||
对照组 | 136 | 60(44.13) | 76(55.87) | 39(28,48) | 29(21.32) | 48(35.30) | 59(43.38) | |
试验组 | 140 | 75(53.57) | 65(46.43) | 38(30,47) | 32(22.86) | 40(28.57) | 68(48.57) | |
检验统计量值 | 2.467a | 0.141b | 1.455a | |||||
P值 | 0.116 | 0.129 | 0.483 | |||||
组别 | 混合痔分期〔n(%)〕 | VAS评分〔M(P25,P75),分〕 | 临床症状评分〔M(P25,P75),分〕 | 肛管静息压( | HF-QoL评分( | 既往史〔n(%)〕 | ||
Ⅰ度 | Ⅱ度 | 有 | 无 | |||||
对照组 | 28(20.59) | 108(79.41) | 4(3,5) | 16(10,22) | 87.28±3.62 | 48.06±8.23 | 17(12.50) | 119(87.50) |
试验组 | 35(25.00) | 105(75.00) | 4(3,5) | 14(10,20) | 86.73±3.18 | 47.22±8.01 | 19(13.57) | 121(86.43) |
检验统计量值 | 0.762a | -1.015b | -1.328b | 1.342c | 0.859c | 0.070a | ||
P值 | 0.383 | 0.211 | 0.184 | 0.181 | 0.391 | 0.792 |
Table 1 Comparison of baseline clinical data of two groups
组别 | 例数 | 性别〔n(%)〕 | 年龄〔M(P25,P75),岁〕 | 混合痔病程〔n(%)〕 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
男 | 女 | <6个月 | 6~12个月 | >12个月 | ||||
对照组 | 136 | 60(44.13) | 76(55.87) | 39(28,48) | 29(21.32) | 48(35.30) | 59(43.38) | |
试验组 | 140 | 75(53.57) | 65(46.43) | 38(30,47) | 32(22.86) | 40(28.57) | 68(48.57) | |
检验统计量值 | 2.467a | 0.141b | 1.455a | |||||
P值 | 0.116 | 0.129 | 0.483 | |||||
组别 | 混合痔分期〔n(%)〕 | VAS评分〔M(P25,P75),分〕 | 临床症状评分〔M(P25,P75),分〕 | 肛管静息压( | HF-QoL评分( | 既往史〔n(%)〕 | ||
Ⅰ度 | Ⅱ度 | 有 | 无 | |||||
对照组 | 28(20.59) | 108(79.41) | 4(3,5) | 16(10,22) | 87.28±3.62 | 48.06±8.23 | 17(12.50) | 119(87.50) |
试验组 | 35(25.00) | 105(75.00) | 4(3,5) | 14(10,20) | 86.73±3.18 | 47.22±8.01 | 19(13.57) | 121(86.43) |
检验统计量值 | 0.762a | -1.015b | -1.328b | 1.342c | 0.859c | 0.070a | ||
P值 | 0.383 | 0.211 | 0.184 | 0.181 | 0.391 | 0.792 |
组别 | 例数 | VAS评分 | 临床症状评分 | ||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
D4 | D7 | D10 | Wald χ2时间值 | P值 | D4 | D7 | D10 | Wald χ2时间值 | P值 | ||||||
对照组 | 136 | 3(3,5) | 3(2,4) | 2(2,3) | 173.454 | <0.001 | 14(8,16) | 8(6,10) | 4(2,4) | 1123.995 | <0.001 | ||||
试验组 | 140 | 3(2,5) | 3(2,4) | 2(1,2) | 12(8,16) | 8(6,10) | 2(2,4) | ||||||||
Z值 | -1.445 | -1.087 | -4.681 | -0.671 | -0.796 | -3.784 | |||||||||
P值 | 0.148 | 0.277 | <0.001 | 0.503 | 0.426 | <0.001 | |||||||||
组别 | 便血评分 | 脱出评分 | 坠胀评分 | ||||||||||||
D4 | D7 | D10 | Waldχ2时间值 | P值 | D4 | D7 | D10 | Waldχ2时间值 | P值 | D4 | D7 | D10 | Waldχ2时间值 | P值 | |
对照组 | 4(2,4) | 2(2,2) | 0(0,2) | 457.793 | <0.001 | 2(0,2) | 0(0,2) | 0(0,0) | 181.055 | <0.001 | 2(2,4) | 2(0,2) | 0(0,2) | 433.018 | <0.001 |
试验组 | 2(2,4) | 2(2,2) | 0(0,2) | 2(0,2) | 0(0,2) | 0(0,0) | 2(2,4) | 2(0.5,2) | 0(0,2) | ||||||
Z值 | -0.248 | -0.426 | -1.994 | -0.688 | -0.567 | -0.872 | -1.076 | -0.360 | -0.817 | ||||||
P值 | 0.804 | 0.670 | 0.046 | 0.491 | 0.571 | 0.383 | 0.282 | 0.719 | 0.414 | ||||||
组别 | 痔黏膜评分 | 痔核大小评分 | |||||||||||||
D4 | D7 | D10 | Wald χ2时间值 | P值 | D4 | D7 | D10 | Wald χ2时间值 | P值 | ||||||
对照组 | 2(2,4) | 2(0,2) | 0(0,2) | 442.806 | <0.001 | 2(2,4) | 2(2,2) | 0(0,2) | 487.879 | <0.001 | |||||
试验组 | 2(2,4) | 2(2,2) | 0(0,0) | 2(2,4) | 2(2,2) | 0(0,2) | |||||||||
Z值 | -0.677 | -0.032 | -1.125 | -0.856 | -0.653 | -3.411 | |||||||||
P值 | 0.499 | 0.975 | 0.261 | 0.392 | 0.513 | <0.001 |
Table 2 Comparison of VAS and clinical symptoms during the follow-up period between two groups
组别 | 例数 | VAS评分 | 临床症状评分 | ||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
D4 | D7 | D10 | Wald χ2时间值 | P值 | D4 | D7 | D10 | Wald χ2时间值 | P值 | ||||||
对照组 | 136 | 3(3,5) | 3(2,4) | 2(2,3) | 173.454 | <0.001 | 14(8,16) | 8(6,10) | 4(2,4) | 1123.995 | <0.001 | ||||
试验组 | 140 | 3(2,5) | 3(2,4) | 2(1,2) | 12(8,16) | 8(6,10) | 2(2,4) | ||||||||
Z值 | -1.445 | -1.087 | -4.681 | -0.671 | -0.796 | -3.784 | |||||||||
P值 | 0.148 | 0.277 | <0.001 | 0.503 | 0.426 | <0.001 | |||||||||
组别 | 便血评分 | 脱出评分 | 坠胀评分 | ||||||||||||
D4 | D7 | D10 | Waldχ2时间值 | P值 | D4 | D7 | D10 | Waldχ2时间值 | P值 | D4 | D7 | D10 | Waldχ2时间值 | P值 | |
对照组 | 4(2,4) | 2(2,2) | 0(0,2) | 457.793 | <0.001 | 2(0,2) | 0(0,2) | 0(0,0) | 181.055 | <0.001 | 2(2,4) | 2(0,2) | 0(0,2) | 433.018 | <0.001 |
试验组 | 2(2,4) | 2(2,2) | 0(0,2) | 2(0,2) | 0(0,2) | 0(0,0) | 2(2,4) | 2(0.5,2) | 0(0,2) | ||||||
Z值 | -0.248 | -0.426 | -1.994 | -0.688 | -0.567 | -0.872 | -1.076 | -0.360 | -0.817 | ||||||
P值 | 0.804 | 0.670 | 0.046 | 0.491 | 0.571 | 0.383 | 0.282 | 0.719 | 0.414 | ||||||
组别 | 痔黏膜评分 | 痔核大小评分 | |||||||||||||
D4 | D7 | D10 | Wald χ2时间值 | P值 | D4 | D7 | D10 | Wald χ2时间值 | P值 | ||||||
对照组 | 2(2,4) | 2(0,2) | 0(0,2) | 442.806 | <0.001 | 2(2,4) | 2(2,2) | 0(0,2) | 487.879 | <0.001 | |||||
试验组 | 2(2,4) | 2(2,2) | 0(0,0) | 2(2,4) | 2(2,2) | 0(0,2) | |||||||||
Z值 | -0.677 | -0.032 | -1.125 | -0.856 | -0.653 | -3.411 | |||||||||
P值 | 0.499 | 0.975 | 0.261 | 0.392 | 0.513 | <0.001 |
组别 | 例数 | VAS评分〔M(P25,P75),分〕 | 临床症状评分〔M(P25,P75),分〕 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
治疗前 | 治疗后 | Z配对值 | P值 | 治疗前 | 治疗后 | Z配对值 | P值 | ||
对照组 | 136 | 4(3,5) | 2(2,3) | -7.017 | <0.001 | 16(10,22) | 4(2,4) | -10.057 | <0.001 |
试验组 | 140 | 4(3,5) | 2(1,2) | -7.469 | <0.001 | 14(10,20) | 2(2,4) | -10.280 | <0.001 |
Z(t)值 | -1.015 | -4.681 | -1.328 | -3.784 | |||||
P值 | 0.211 | <0.001 | 0.184 | <0.001 | |||||
组别 | 肛管静息压( | HF-QoL评分( | |||||||
治疗前 | 治疗后 | t配对值 | P值 | 治疗前 | 治疗后 | t配对值 | P值 | ||
对照组 | 87.28±3.62 | 84.28±3.61 | 6.843 | <0.001 | 48.06±8.23 | 38.57±4.94 | 11.653 | <0.001 | |
试验组 | 86.73±3.18 | 83.23±3.18 | 9.209 | <0.001 | 47.22±8.01 | 34.87±4.03 | 16.297 | <0.001 | |
Z(t)值 | 1.342a | 2.566a | 0.859a | 6.827a | |||||
P值 | 0.181 | 0.011 | 0.391 | <0.001 |
Table 3 Comparison of efficacy indicators in two groups of before and after treatment
组别 | 例数 | VAS评分〔M(P25,P75),分〕 | 临床症状评分〔M(P25,P75),分〕 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
治疗前 | 治疗后 | Z配对值 | P值 | 治疗前 | 治疗后 | Z配对值 | P值 | ||
对照组 | 136 | 4(3,5) | 2(2,3) | -7.017 | <0.001 | 16(10,22) | 4(2,4) | -10.057 | <0.001 |
试验组 | 140 | 4(3,5) | 2(1,2) | -7.469 | <0.001 | 14(10,20) | 2(2,4) | -10.280 | <0.001 |
Z(t)值 | -1.015 | -4.681 | -1.328 | -3.784 | |||||
P值 | 0.211 | <0.001 | 0.184 | <0.001 | |||||
组别 | 肛管静息压( | HF-QoL评分( | |||||||
治疗前 | 治疗后 | t配对值 | P值 | 治疗前 | 治疗后 | t配对值 | P值 | ||
对照组 | 87.28±3.62 | 84.28±3.61 | 6.843 | <0.001 | 48.06±8.23 | 38.57±4.94 | 11.653 | <0.001 | |
试验组 | 86.73±3.18 | 83.23±3.18 | 9.209 | <0.001 | 47.22±8.01 | 34.87±4.03 | 16.297 | <0.001 | |
Z(t)值 | 1.342a | 2.566a | 0.859a | 6.827a | |||||
P值 | 0.181 | 0.011 | 0.391 | <0.001 |
组别 | 例数 | 痊愈 | 显效 | 有效 | 无效 | 总有效 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
对照组 | 136 | 95(69.85) | 19(13.98) | 10(7.35) | 12(8.82) | 124(91.18) |
试验组 | 140 | 118(84.28)a | 12(8.57) | 5(3.57) | 5(3.58) | 135(96.43) |
Table 4 Comparison of the overall curative effect between two groups
组别 | 例数 | 痊愈 | 显效 | 有效 | 无效 | 总有效 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
对照组 | 136 | 95(69.85) | 19(13.98) | 10(7.35) | 12(8.82) | 124(91.18) |
试验组 | 140 | 118(84.28)a | 12(8.57) | 5(3.57) | 5(3.58) | 135(96.43) |
[1] |
田振国,陈平. 中国成人常见肛肠疾病流行病学调查[M]. 武汉:武汉大学出版社,2015.
|
[2] |
|
[3] |
|
[4] |
|
[5] |
中国中西医结合学会大肠肛门病专业委员会.中国痔病诊疗指南(2020)[J].结直肠肛门外科,2020,26(5):519-533.
|
[6] |
中华医学会外科学分会结直肠肛门外科学组,中华中医药学会肛肠病专业委员会,中国中西医结合学会结直肠肛门病专业委员会. 痔临床诊治指南(2006版)[J]. 中华胃肠外科杂志,2006,9(5):461-463. DOI:10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-0274.2006.05.039.
|
[7] |
中华中医药学会. 中医肛肠科常见病诊疗指南[M]. 北京:中国中医药出版社,2012.
|
[8] |
田茂生,戚文月,刘朝阳,等. 痔病相似症状定量评估模型的实验研究[J]. 中华中医药杂志,2020,35(10):5237-5240.
|
[9] |
孙松朋,龙俊红,张书信. 痔病患者显微镜下痔组织出血情况及其影响因素研究[J]. 中国全科医学,2020,23(33):4190-4195. DOI:10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2020.00.434.
|
[10] |
周世勇,艾飞,刘德武,等. TST术联合聚桂醇点状注射治疗混合痔合并直肠黏膜内脱垂临床观察[J]. 中国全科医学,2021,24(S2):76-79.
|
[11] | |
[12] |
安文政,刘青,付文亮,等. 贻贝黏附蛋白研究进展[J]. 军事医学,2021,45(10):798-801.
|
[13] |
高记华,田茂生,戚文月,等. 贻贝粘蛋白肛肠敷料治疗肛肠皮肤黏膜损伤的专家共识[J]. 中国肛肠病杂志,2021,41(8):77-80.
|
[14] |
程跃,周晋,侯艳梅,等. 基于倾向性匹配法评价苦参汤熏洗结合八髎穴盒灸治疗高位复杂性肛瘘患者术后并发症的临床疗效研究[J]. 中国全科医学,2017,20(3):342-346. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1007-9572.2017.03.015.
|
[15] |
高记华,陈雪清,齐立卿,等. 肛肠病术后运用痛痒消洗剂的临床研究[J]. 中华中医药杂志,2005,20(8):508-509. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1673-1727.2005.08.024.
|
[16] |
王娜,朱忠宁,王非,等. 痛痒消洗剂的急性毒性与刺激性试验研究[J]. 河北医科大学学报,2007,28(1):38-39. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1007-3205.2007.01.013.
|
[17] |
|
[18] |
陈红风. 中医外科学[M]. 4版. 北京:中国中医药出版社,2016.
|
[19] |
郑筱萸. 中药新药临床研究指导原则:试行[M]. 北京:中国医药科技出版社,2002.
|
[20] |
曹卉娟,邢建民,刘建平. 视觉模拟评分法在症状类结局评价测量中的应用[J]. 中医杂志,2009,50(7):600-602. DOI:10.13288/j.11-2166/r.2009.07.001.
|
[21] |
严广斌. 视觉模拟评分法[J]. 中华关节外科杂志:电子版,2014,8(2):273.
|
[22] |
中华中医药学会. 中医肛肠科临床诊疗指南[M]. 北京:中国中医药出版社,2020.
|
[23] |
|
[24] |
|
[25] |
|
[26] |
|
[27] |
|
[28] | |
[29] |
王健,李丁. 痔的病理生理学研究进展[J]. 中国病理生理杂志,2010,26(1):193-196.
|
[30] |
|
[31] |
张东铭. 肛垫黏膜的生物学特性及其临床意义[C].第十一次全国中西医结合大肠肛门病学术会议论文汇编,2006:40-44.
|
[32] | |
[33] |
|
[34] |
|
[35] |
|
[36] | |
[37] |
马继兴. 马王堆古医书考释[M]. 长沙:湖南科学技术出版社,1992.
|
[38] |
柏连松,张雅明. 柏氏肛肠病学[M]. 上海:上海科学技术出版社,2016.
|
[39] | |
[40] |
张力,梁学敏,范小华,等. 中药熏洗坐浴治疗混合痔术后疼痛的Meta分析[J]. 中国医药导报,2018,15(21):129-133.
|
[1] | ZHANG Di, LI Hongpeng, MA Jiang, NIE Qian, SUN Jianfeng, WU Zhipeng, ZHANG Hongcai, ZHAO Jue. Effect of Ocular Acupuncture and Exercise Combination Therapy on Postoperative Heart Rate Variability and Prognosis of Patients Treated with Percutaneous Coronary Intervention [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(36): 4535-4544. |
[2] | HE Jingyi, WANG Fang, SHUI Xiaoling, LI Ling, LIANG Qian. Efficacy of Non-pharmacological Interventions to Improve Perimenopausal Insomnia Symptoms: a Network Meta-analysis [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(31): 3963-3974. |
[3] | QU Hui, LI Huan, TANG Ruohan, DU Yuzheng, ZHAO Qi. Outcome Indicators Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials of Acupuncture for Obstructive Sleep Apnea Hypopnea Syndrome in the Past Decade [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(30): 3734-3739. |
[4] | LIU Jian, ZHANG Tianyi, AILIZHATI ·Aizezi, CHANG Ruijing, ZHANG Jianli, WANG Wan, JIANG Peng. Cardiopulmonary Physiology Effects of Wearing a Surgical Mask Versus an N95 Respirator in Patients with COPD during Walking: a Randomized Crossover Controlled Trial [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(24): 3028-3032. |
[5] | XUE Shan, LI Laiyou, LIANG Junli, JIN Yinghui, WEI Shuyan. The Efficacy and Safety of Home Enteral Nutrition in Patients with Esophageal Cancer: a Meta-analysis [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(20): 2540-2547. |
[6] | WANG Qiuqin, ZHANG Yutong, XU Yuchen, BAI Yamei, CHEN Hua, JIANG Rongrong, YAN Shuxia, WANG Qing, XU Guihua, XIE Ying, QIAO Chun, YANG Juan. Short-term Clinical Effect of Guasha Combined with Drug Therapy on Idiopathic Parkinson's Disease [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(17): 2155-2161. |
[7] | ZHOU Min, ZHENG Ziguang, YOU Hongyu, GUO Miao, YU Wei, YANG Xu. Effects of Reducing Indoor Air Particles on Cardiovascular and Respiratory Physiological Indexes in the Elderly: a Randomized Crossover Controlled Trial [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(17): 2114-2119. |
[8] | CAI Ming, WANG Liyan, YANG Ruoyu, LIANG Leichao, YANG Yuanyuan, JIA Shihao, CHEN Ruiyi, REN Yu, LIU Qianle, HU Jingyun. Short-term High-intensity Interval Training Reduces the Accumulation of Advanced Glycation End Products and the Risk of Cardiovascular Disease in Normal Weight Obese Female University Students: a Randomized Controlled Trial [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(12): 1472-1478. |
[9] | PENG Siyang, LI Shaohong, TIAN Yukun, MENG Linghao, FANG Ruiying, ZHU Wenzeng. Current Status of the Selection of Outcomes in Randomized Controlled Trials of Traditional Chinese Medicine in the Treatment of Myasthenia Gravis [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(11): 1340-1347. |
[10] | LI Lingling, HUANG Hailiang, YU Ying, JIA Yuqi, LIU Zhiyao, SHI Xin, WANG Fangqi, LIU Xinyue. Effect of Non-invasive Brain Stimulation on Autism Spectrum Disorder: a Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(11): 1389-1397. |
[11] | LIN Huize, YAN Wenxi, ZHANG Pingping, FEI Jingwen, SHEN Jianghong, LIU Lanping, WANG Xiang, ZHU Kexin, YANG Tao, YU Jinna. Outcome Measures Used in Randomized Controlled Trials of Acupuncture for Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(09): 1053-1063. |
[12] | FEI Jingwen, LIN Huize, ZHANG Pingping, LIU Lanping, WANG Xiang, SHEN Jianghong, ZHU Kexin, YANG Tao, YU Jinna. Motion Style Acupuncture Can Effectively Improve the Effectiveness of Acute Nonspecific Low Back Pain: a Meta-analysis [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(09): 1044-1052. |
[13] | GUAN Ningxiao, YAO Zhuoya, LI Ye, LIU Ziwei, LIU Fangli. Non-invasive Brain Stimulation Techniques Can Effectively Relieve Post-stroke Fatigue: a Meta-analysis [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(08): 1008-1014. |
[14] | XIONG Dan, XIE Haihua, LI Hao, ZHANG Hong, TAN Jie, ZHAO Ning. Effect of Different Modalities of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation on Post-stroke Upper Limb Motor Dysfunction: a Network Meta-analysis [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(08): 997-1007. |
[15] | HU Shuwei, OU Wei, WANG Zhi, PENG Juan. Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing versus Sertraline in the Treatment of Depressed Adolescents with Childhood Trauma [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(06): 692-698. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||