辛夷鼻炎丸治疗外感风热证疗效分析

Efficacy Analysis of XinYi BiYan Wan in the Treatment of Exogenous Wind-heat Syndrome

目的:比较辛夷鼻炎丸与芎菊上清丸治疗外感风热证的临床疗效。方法:将急性上呼吸道感染(外感风热证)患者90例按照2∶1的比例随机分为治疗组(60例)和对照组(30例)。治疗组口服辛夷鼻炎丸,3 g/次,3次/d;对照组口服芎菊上清丸6 g/次,2次/d;疗程均为3天。评价治疗后各项症状体征改善情况、起效时间及安全性。结果:治疗组治愈显效率为75.0%,有效率为100.0%;对照组治愈显效率为66.7%,有效率为100.0%,2组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);2组均未出现不良反应;2组对血常规、肝肾功能指标未见不良影响。结论:辛夷鼻炎丸治疗急性上呼吸道感染(外感风热证)的疗效与芎菊上清丸相当,两组治疗后的症状改善情况均优于治疗前,且安全性较好。

Objective： To compare the differences of Xin Yi Bi Yan Wan and Xiong Ju Shang Qing Wan in the treatment of exogenous wind-heat syndrome. Methods： Totally 90 patients with upper respiratory tract infection（exogenous wind-heat syndrome） were collected from the hospitals between Jun. 2010 and Feb. 2011. With a ratio of2：1, the 90 cases were randomly allocated into treatment group（n=60） and control group（n=30）. Xin Yi Bi Yan Wan for 3 times a day and 3 g once were orally administered to the cases in the treatment group while Xiong Ju Shang Qing Wan for twice a day and 6 g once given to cases in the control group. After treatment, the improvement of the patients＇ vital symptoms and signs as well as the medicines＇ onset time and safety were evaluated in both groups.Results： The markedly effective rate and the effective rate of the treatment group were 75.0% and 100.0%respectively, while those of the control group were 66.7% and 100.0 %. The comparison of the differences in both groups had no statistical meaning（P〉0.05）; no adverse reaction was reported in two group; no adverse effect on blood routine and indexes of liver and kidney functions was observed in the two groups. Conclusion： The clinical efficacy of Xin Yi Bi Yan Wan is equal to that of Xiong Ju Shang Qing Wan in treating upper respiratory tract infection.They are safer because the improvement of symptoms in the two groups after treatment was better than that before treatment.