不同熏洗方式对混合痔术后疗效影响的比较研究

Comparative study on curative effects of three different fumigating and washing methods in patients after hemorrhoidectomy

目的评价中药熏浴、坐浴、冲洗3种不同熏洗方式对混合痔术后疗效的影响。方法根据入选标准选择180例混合痔术后患者，分别在江苏省中医院、江苏省中西医结合医院两中心参加该项研究，采用随机数字表法随机分为熏浴组、坐浴组、冲洗组各60例，每个中心各30例，比较三组术后疼痛、肛缘水肿和创面愈合情况。结果三组疼痛评分随时间逐渐下降，冲洗组在术后第7天疼痛评分（2．32±0．82）分，熏浴组（2．65±0．04）分，坐浴组（3．05±0．02）分，三组比较差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05），其余时间点疼痛评分比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。肛缘水肿、创面愈合情况三组比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论中药冲洗减轻混合痔术后疼痛优于中药熏浴、坐浴，三种不同熏洗方式在减轻肛缘水肿、缩短创面愈合时间方面作用相当。

Objective To evaluate the curative effect of fumigating and washing therapy with Chinese medicine bath, sitz bath and flushing method in patients after hemorrhoideetomy. Methods A total of 180 patients with hemorrhoidectomy were selected as the research object and participated in the research in Jiangsu Province Hospital of TCM and Jiangsu Hospital of integrated TCM and western medicine. According to random number table, they were assigned to the bath group, the sits bath group and the flushing group, with 60 cases in each group and 30 cases in each research center. The pain after surgery, around anus edema and intertion status of wounds in three groups were compared.Results The results showed that the scores of postoperative pain were gradually decreased. The score of postoperative pain at 7th day was （2.32±0.82） points in the flushing group; （2.65±0.04） points in the bath group, and （3.05±0.02） points in the sitz bath group （P〈0.05）. The difference of pain scores at other time was not significant （P〉0. 05 ）. No significant difference in around anus edema and intertion status of wounds among three groups （P〉0. 05 ）. Conclusions Chinese medicine flushing therapy offers a better pain relief than sitz bath and bath method. There are no significant differences in shorting the time of wound healing and reducing the around anus edema.