摘要
目的:研究臭氧疗法治疗脑动脉供血不足的疗效与安全性。方法:随机选取100例为样本,随机分为两组。对照组给予常规药物治疗,观察组采用臭氧疗法治疗。对比两组有效率、血压、血脂、治疗预后等指标。结果:治疗后2周,观察组有效率98%(49/50)、SBP(105.5±2.6)mm Hg(1 mm Hg=0.1333 kPa)、DBP(91.2±3.0)mm Hg、TC(5.1±0.1)mmol/L、TG(1.2±0.1)mmol/L,不良反应发生率0%(0/100),1年内复发率2%(1/50)。对照组有效率86%(43/50)、SBP(129.6±4.8)mm Hg、DBP(110.6±4.8)mm Hg、TC(6.2±0.2)mmol/L、TG(1.8±0.2)mmol/L,不良反应发生率16%(8/50),1年内复发率18%(9/100)。两组对比,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:将臭氧疗法应用到脑动脉供血不足的治疗中,有效率高,且无不良反应,可同时降低患者的血压与血脂指标,实现多病同治,且具有复发率低、推广价值较高。
Objective to study the efficacy and safety of ozone therapy in the treatment of cerebral artery insufficiency.Method 100 patients with cerebral arterial insufficiency were randomly selected as samples and randomly divided into two groups.The control group was treated with routine drugs,while the observation group was treated with ozone therapy.Effectiveness,blood pressure,blood lipid and prognosis were compared between the two groups.Results Two weeks after treatment,the effective rate of the observation group was 98%(49/50),SBP(105.5±2.6)mm Hg,DBP(91.2±3.0)mm Hg,TC(5.1±0.1)mmol/L,TG(1.2±0.1)mmol/L,the incidence of adverse reactions was 0%(0/100),and the recurrence rate was 2%(1/50)within one year.The effective rate of control group was 86%(43/50),SBP(129.6±4.8)mm Hg,DBP(110.6±4.8)mm Hg,TC(6.2±0.2)mmol/L,TG(1.8±0.2)mmol/L,the incidence of adverse reactions was 16%(8/50),and the recurrence rate was 18%(9/100)within one year.There was a significant difference between the two groups(P<0.05).Conclusion Ozone therapy is effective and has no side effects in the treatment of cerebral artery insufficiency.It can reduce the blood pressure and blood lipid index of patients at the same time,realize the treatment of multiple diseases,and has low recurrence rate and high popularization value.
作者
欧阳莉
OU Yang-Li(Department of Rehabilitation,Dazhou Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine Hospital of Sichuan Province,Dazhou 635000,China)
出处
《吉林医学》
CAS
2020年第11期2604-2606,共3页
Jilin Medical Journal
关键词
臭氧疗法
脑动脉供血不足
临床疗效
不良发应
Ozone therapy
Cerebral artery insufficiency
Clinical efficacy
Adverse reaction