论文部分内容阅读
目的:对比分析多索茶碱与氨茶碱治疗支气管哮喘临床疗效。方法:选取2016年6月到2017年6月于本院接受治疗的74例支气管哮喘患者,双盲法纳入多索茶碱组与氨茶碱组(n=37)。常规治疗基础上,分别为两组患者应用多索茶碱与氨茶碱治疗,比较两组患者的临床治疗总有效率以及患者的不良反应发生情况。结果:多索茶碱组患者的临床治疗总有效率为97.3%,与氨茶碱组患者的临床治疗总有效率83.78%相比差异显著,存在统计学价值(p<0.05)。同时,多索茶碱组患者出现2例不良反应,氨茶碱组患者发生6例不良反应,组间差异比较具有统计学意义(p<0.05)。结论:相较于氨茶碱,多索茶碱治疗支气管哮喘的临床疗效比较显著,患者的临床治疗总有效率较高,且不良反应发生率较低,建议作为支气管哮喘患者的临床治疗首选药物。
Objective: To compare the clinical efficacy of doxofylline and aminophylline in the treatment of bronchial asthma. Methods: A total of 74 patients with bronchial asthma who were treated in our hospital from June 2016 to June 2017 were enrolled in the study. The patients were treated with doxofylline and aminophylline in a double-blind manner (n = 37). On the basis of routine treatment, two groups of patients were treated with doxofylline and aminophylline, respectively. The total effective rate of clinical treatment and adverse reactions of patients in both groups were compared. Results: The total effective rate of clinical treatment in the doxofylline group was 97.3%, which was significantly different from the clinical effective rate of 83.78% in the aminophylline group (p <0.05). At the same time, there were 2 adverse reactions in the doxofylline group and 6 adverse reactions in the aminophylline group. The difference between the two groups was statistically significant (p <0.05). Conclusion: Compared with aminophylline, the clinical efficacy of doxofylline in the treatment of bronchial asthma is quite significant. The total effective rate of clinical treatment in patients is high and the incidence of adverse reactions is low. Therefore, it is recommended as the first choice of clinical treatment for patients with bronchial asthma .