奥硝唑、替硝唑和甲硝唑在口腔治疗的应用和药效对比

The application and efficacy of ornidazole, tinidazole and metronidazole in oral treatment

目的对比分析奥硝唑、替硝唑和甲硝唑在口腔治疗中的应用效果。方法选取本院2016年1月~2017年6月期间收治的126例急性冠周炎患者,采用随机数字表法将其分为3组,采用奥硝唑治疗的患者设置为A组,采用替硝唑治疗的设置为B组,采用甲硝唑治疗的设置为C组,对比3组的治疗总有效率及不良反应。结果 1个疗程后,A、B两组的治疗总有效率高于C组(P<0.05),A、B组间比较差异无统计学意义;2个疗程后,3组的治疗总有效率比较差异无统计学意义。用药期间,A组、B组患者的不良反应发生率低于C组(P<0.05);A、B两组间比较差异无统计学意义。结论应用奥硝唑、替硝唑和甲硝唑在口腔治疗中均有显著效果,但奥硝唑、替硝唑的起效时间快于甲硝唑,不良反应少于甲硝唑,因此奥硝唑、替硝唑更具推广价值。

Objective This paper makes a comparative analysis of the application effects of ornidazole,tinidazole and metronidazole in oral treatment.Methods A total of 126 patients with acute periarthritis admitted to our hospital from January 2016 to June 2017 were enrolled,it can be divided into three groups by random number table method,the patients treated with ornidazole set to group A,the indications for treatment of set to group B,set to group C treated with metronidazole,compare the three groups of treatment the total effective rate and adverse reactions.Results After 1 course of treatment,the total effective rate of treatment in both groups A and B was higher than that in group C(P<0.05),but there was no difference between group A and group B;After 2 courses,the total effective rate of treatment was no difference in the three groups.The adverse reactions of group A and group B were lower than those in group C(P<0.05),there was no difference between group A and B.Conclusion Application of ornidazole,for indications and metronidazole in oral treatment have a significant effect,but for indications of ornidazole and working time faster than metronidazole,adverse reaction less than metronidazole,therefore ornidazole and indications for more promotion value.