慢性主观性耳鸣的治疗方法及疗效探讨

The discussion of therapeutic method and curative effect on chronic subjectivity tinnitus

目的探讨不同治疗方法在慢性主观性耳鸣治疗中的作用并进行分析。方法将符合纳入标准的154例患者分为3组,A组给予前列腺素E1静脉推注治疗,B组给予声治疗,C组给予前列腺素E1静脉推注联合声治疗,其中B组和C组均有专业的耳鼻喉科医师对其进行耳鸣相关知识的辅导。结果治疗2周后有效率,A组为37.5%,B组为32.0%,C组为40.0%,3组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);治疗4周后有效率,A组为54.2%,B组为74.0%,C组为78.0%,A组与B组、A组与C组间差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),但B、C组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。A组治疗2、4周后疗效比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),B组和C组治疗2、4周后疗效比较,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论慢性主观性耳鸣治疗以习服治疗为主,习服治疗可作为慢性主观性耳鸣患者的首选治疗方法。

Objective to investigate and analyze the effects of different therapeutic methods on chronic subjective tinnitus .Meth‐ods To divide 154 patients who meet the criterion into 3 groups .In group A ,prostaglandin E1 vein injection method was carried out .In group B ,TRT was carried out .In group C ,the measures mentioned in both group A and B were taken .Professional otolaryn‐gological doctors provided tinnitus treatment guidance to patients in both group B and C .Results After two weeks treatment ,the effective rate for group A was 37 .5% ,32 .0% for group B and 40 .0% for group C .There was no obvious difference among group A ,B and C（P〉0 .05） .After 4 weeks of treatment ,the effective rates for group A ,B and C were 54 .2% ,74 .0% and 78 .0% respec‐tively ,and the difference between group A and group B has statistical significance（P〈0 .05） .However ,there was no statistical sig‐nificance between group B and group C（P〉0 .05） .The two week and four week curative effect difference of group A has no statis‐tical significance（P〉0 .05） .But there was statistical significance for two week and four week curative effect difference in group B and group C（P〈0 .05） .Conclusion tinnitus retraining therapy is taken as the principal thing for chronic subjective tinnitus treat‐ment .Chronic subjective tinnitus treatment should give first place to tinnitus retraining therapy .