新伤汤及活血祛瘀散治疗膝关节急性创伤性滑膜炎的疗效观察

Effects of Xinshang decoction and Huoxuequyu powder in the treatment of knee joint acute traumatic synovitis

目的：观察新伤汤及活血祛瘀散治疗膝关节急性创伤性滑膜炎的疗效。方法2014年8月～2015年12月期间入院及门诊治疗的膝关节急性创伤性滑膜炎患者共60例。将该60例患者作为研究对象随机分为治疗组和对照组，每组30例。两组患者均给予基础治疗。除此之外，治疗组给予本院中医骨伤科验方新伤汤内服及活血祛瘀散外用；对照组给予中医经典方桃红四物汤内服及双柏散外敷。两组患者治疗疗程均为1个月。评价两组患者的临床治疗疗效。比较两组患者治疗前、治疗过程中第2周、治疗结束后VAS评分、Bristol评分及用药安全性。与治疗结束后评定两组患者的Liket评分、LLiket评分。观察并记录两组患者治疗过程中的不良反应情况。结果治疗前及治疗过程中第2周，两组患者的VAS评分、Bristol膝关节评分差异不明显（P＞0.05）。治疗结束后，两组患者的VAS评分、Bristol膝关节评分差异具有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。两组患者治疗前、治疗过程中第2周、治疗结束后三个时间点VAS评分、Bristol膝关节评分差异具有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。对照组患者治疗前后Liket评分、治疗组患者治疗前后Liket评分和LLiket评分差异具有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。治疗后，两组患者Liket评分、LLiket评分差异具有统计学意义（ P＜0.05）。两组患者治疗前后血、尿、便常规及肝、肾功能，心电图检查均未见异常。两组患者治疗前后均出现不同程度的皮疹、皮肤红潮等过敏反应，对照组不良反应发生率为16.67%（5/30），治疗组不良反应发生率为10.00%（3/30），两组患者不良反应发生情况差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。结论中医药治疗相比经典中药治疗疗效显著，患者治疗后疼痛程度减轻，安全可靠，值得在临床推广使用。

ObjectiveTo explore the effects of Xinshang Decoction and Huoxuequyu Powder in the treatment of knee joint acute traumatic synovitis.Methods60 patients with knee joint acute traumatic synovitis who were in our hospital or received treatment in the outpatient clinic of our hospital from August 2014 to December 2015 were randomly divided into treatment group and control group, 30 cases in each group. All patients received basic treatments, in addition, the treatment group was treated with oral Xinshang Decoction and external Huoxuequyu Powder, which is a proved recipe of the TCM orthopedics and traumatology department in our hospital, while the control group was treated with classical TCM recipe of oral Taohongsiwu Decoction and external Shuangbai Powder. The therapeutic processes of the two groups all lasted for one month, and the clinical effects of the two groups were estimated. The VAS scores, Bristol scores, and medication safety of the two groups before treatment, at the 2nd week of treatment, and after treatment were compared. The Liket scores and LLiket scores of two groups after treatment were evaluated and compared. The adverse reactions of the two groups during treatment were recorded.Results The VAS scores and knee joint Bristol scores of the two groups before and at the 2nd week of treatment were not statistically different（P〉0.05）. After treatment, the VAS scores and knee joint Bristol scores of the two groups were statistically different（P〈0.05）. The VAS scores and knee joint Bristol scores of the two groups before treatment, at the 2nd week of treatment, and after treatment were statistically different（P〈0.05）. The Liket scores of the control group before and after treatment, as well as the Liket and LLiket scores of the treatment group before and after treatment were statistically different（P〈0.05）. After treatment, the differences of Liket and LLiket scores between the two groups were statistically significant（P〈0.05）. The routine blood, urine, and stool tests, as well as liver functional, kidney＆nbsp;functional, and electrocardiographic examinations of the two groups before and after treatment were all normal. There were anaphylactic reactions of skin rashes and red tides occurred to different extent in both two groups, the adverse reaction rate of the control group was 16.67%（5/30）, while that of the treatment group was 10.00%（3/30）, the difference was no statistically significant（P〉0.05）.Conclusion Our proved recipe is effective than the classical TCM recipe, which alleviates patients’ post-treatment pain and is safe. It is worthy of clinical promotion.