清热化瘀与清热益气化瘀疗法治疗急性软组织损伤疗效分析

Therapeutic Effect of Clearing away Heat and Removing Phlegm and Clearing away Heat and Relieving Phlegm and Removing Blood Stasis on Acute Soft Tissve Injury

目的分析清热化瘀与清热益气化瘀疗法治疗急性软组织损伤的治疗效果。方法选择2018年2月-2019年10月来该院医治且符合该次研究标准的急性踝关节扭伤患者120例,按照随机数表法分为两组,各60例,对照组利用清热化瘀浸渍药液进行治疗,治疗组则是采用清热益气化瘀浸渍药液进行治疗,在两种方法下记录临床数据,对比临床治疗效果。结果根据计算对比分析发现对照组的总治疗有效率76.67%,远远低于治疗组的总治疗有效率90.00%,差异有统计学意义(χ^2=6.740,P<0.01);在进行两组患儿临床症状消失时间对比时,观测发现治疗组平均肿胀、疼痛恢复正常的时间都比对照组短,发现治疗后相比于治疗前症状积分水平均有了较为明显降低,而且治疗组低于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。治疗组和对照组在对皮肤状态是否过敏、是否出现瘙痒等进行测试后,发现两组并未出现不良反应。结论针对急性软组织损伤对比治疗数据和效果来看,清热益气化瘀治疗法的临床症状缓解更快,可加速患者益气化瘀,有效减轻患者炎症反应,消肿止痛,并且用药安全。

Objective To analyze the therapeutic effect of Clearing away Heat and Removing Phlegm and Clearing away Heat and Relieving Phlegm and Removing Blood Stasis Therapy on acute soft group injury. Methods A total of 120 patients with acute ankle sprain who came to the hospital from February 2018 to October 2019 were enrolled in this study. According to the random number table method, 60 patients in each group, the patients were divided into two groups. Therapeutic group was treated with Clearing away Heat and Removing Phlegm immersion liquid, and the clinical data were recorded under two methods to compare the clinical treatment effects. Results According to the comparative analysis, the total effective rate of the control group was 76.67%, which was far lower than the total treatment efficiency of the treatment group by 90.00%. The difference was statistically significant( χ^2=6.740, P<0.01). When the clinical symptoms disappeared, the observation showed that the average swelling and pain recovery time in the treatment group were shorter than that in the control group. It was found that the symptom scores were significantly lower after treatment than in the treatment group, and the treatment group was lower than the control group, the difference was statistically significant( P<0.05). After the test group and the control group were tested for allergies to the skin condition and whether itching occurred, it was found that no adverse reactions occurred in the two groups. Conclusion According to the comparison of treatment data and effects of acute soft tissue injury, the clinical symptoms of Clearing away Heat and Removing Phlegm treatment are relieved faster, which can accelerate the patient’s benefit of phlegm and blood stasis, effectively alleviate the patient’s inflammatory reaction, reduce swelling and pain, with safe medication.