不同给药方案的噻托溴铵治疗哮喘合并慢阻肺的疗效对比

Comparison of the efficacy of tiotropium bromide with different dosage regimens in the treatment of asthma complicated with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

目的对比不同给药方案的噻托溴铵治疗哮喘合并慢性阻塞性肺疾病(慢阻肺)的临床疗效。方法 90例哮喘合并慢阻肺患者,按照随机分配原则分为甲组和乙组,各45例。甲组患者使用噻托溴铵粉吸入剂每日早晚各1次,乙组患者使用噻托溴铵粉吸入剂仅1次/晚,对比两组患者的临床疗效及不良反应发生情况。结果甲组患者中显效31例、好转10例、无效4例,乙组患者分别为30、12、3例,对比差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。甲组患者不良反应发生率为6.67%,乙组患者不良反应发生率为8.89%,两组不良反应发生率对比,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论不同给药方式的噻托溴铵在治疗哮喘合并慢阻肺时的临床疗效及安全性均较好,临床工作中医生可向患者提供两种治疗方案供患者选择,提高患者的依从性。

Objective To compare the clinical efficacy of tiotropium bromide with different dosage regimens in the treatment of asthma complicated with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Methods A total of 90 patients with asthma complicated with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were randomly divided into group A and group B, with 45 cases in each group. Group A received tiotropium bromide powder for inhalation by 1 time in each morning and evening, and group B received tiotropium bromide powder for inhalation by 1 time/night. Comparison were made on clinical efficacy and occurrence of adverse reactions between the two groups. Results Group A had 31 excellent cases, 10 improved cases and 4 ineffective cases, which were 30, 12 and 3 cases in group B, and their difference was not statistically significant（P〉0.05）. Group A had incidence of adverse reactions as 6.67%, which was 8.89% in group B, and both groups had no statistically significant difference in incidence of adverse reactions（P〉0.05）. Conclusion Tiotropium bromide with different dosage regimens shows better clinical efficacy and safety in the treatment of asthma complicated with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Clinical doctors can provide patients with two kinds of treatment options for patient selection to improve patient compliance.