消炎解痛膏凝胶剂与橡胶型的疗效比较

Effects of gel form vs rubber form of Xiaoyan Jietong Gao

目的 :比较消炎解痛膏的凝胶剂与橡胶型抗炎症的疗效。方法 :凝胶剂组 10 0例 (男性 69例 ,女性 31例 ;年龄 4 9a±s2 5a) ,对照组为消炎解痛膏 (橡胶型 ) 60例 (男性 2 6例 ,女性 34例 ;年龄 4 6a± 2 1a)治疗病种均为膝关节骨关节炎、肩周炎、腰间盘突出症等伤骨科常见疾病 ,每 12h贴患处 1～ 2张 ,连续治疗 7d ,观察局部疼痛、活动度及皮肤反应。结果 :凝胶剂组总有效率 88% ,橡胶型组总有效率 80 % (P >0 .0 5) ,但凝胶剂组无 1例出现皮肤搔痒或皮疹 ,而橡胶型组皮疹率达 2 3% ,经t检验差别有非常显著意义 (P <0 .0 1)。结论 :凝胶剂组与橡胶型组具有相同的治疗效果 。

AIM: To compare the clinical efficacy of antiphlogistic and analgesic plaster (rubber form) and antiphlogistic and analgesic plaster (gel form). METHEDS: One hundred patients (M 69,F 31;age 49 a±s25 a) were treated with the gel form plaster, and sixty patients (M 26,F 34,age 46 a±21 a) were treated with the rubber form plaster as adhesive form group. The diseases to be cured are ordinary osteopathia, such as patellar arthritis, omarthritis, harmated lumbus disk, etc. The topically applied 1-2 patch at affected region, q 12 h for 7 d. The indices observed were local pain, mobility, with or without dermoreaction. RESULTS: The total effective rate of the gel form group was 88%. The total effective rate of the rubber form group was 80%(P>0.05). No dermatoitching or dermexanthesis was observed in the gel form group, and the rate of dermexanthesis in the rubber form group reached 23% (P<0.01). CONCLUSION: The gel form has simlar effect to rubber form, but its skin irritability are less.