本文選題：慢性胃炎 + 胃腸癥狀分級評估量表��； 參考：《山東大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：研究目的： 觀察黛力新聯(lián)合埃索美拉唑、莫沙必利在慢性胃炎治療(chronic gastritis, CG)中的療效。 研究方法： 選擇在2012年9月至2014年1月期間在山東大學(xué)附屬濟南市中心醫(yī)院消化內(nèi)科門診及入院治療的符合入組標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的64例慢性胃炎(CG)患者,其中男性患者30例,女性患者34例,患者的年齡為45～67歲,平均年齡為58歲。64例患者被隨機分為試驗組和對照組兩組。試驗組：男性患者共14例,女性患者共18例。對照組：男性患者共16例,女性患者共16例。通過統(tǒng)計分析,患者的性別和年齡組成在試驗組和對照組之間無顯著差異(P0.05)。試驗組患者給予氟哌噻噸美利曲辛片(黛力新,丹麥靈北制藥有限公司,10.5mg/片),每日2次(早、中午),每次10.5mg；埃索美拉唑鎂腸溶片(耐信,阿斯利康制藥有限公司,20mg/片),每日2次(早、晚),每次20mg；枸櫞酸莫沙必利膠囊(美唯寧,上海信誼藥廠有限公司,5mg/片),每日3次,每次10mg；對照組患者給予埃索美拉唑鎂腸溶片,每日2次(早、晚),每次20mg；枸櫞酸莫沙必利片,每日3次,每次10mg治療。療程均為4周,患者在治療期間被禁止食用刺激性食物及其他可能影響試驗的藥物。試驗開始前和4周后,兩組患者分別行GSRS-C、HAD、EQ-5D評估并記錄評分。所有患者在整個試驗過程中如出現(xiàn)不良反應(yīng)會被詳細的予以記錄。應(yīng)用SPSS19.0軟件分析整個試驗過程中的數(shù)據(jù)資料,計量資料通過均數(shù)±標(biāo)準(zhǔn)差(x±s)的形式來表示,差異有顯著性的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)為P0.05。 研究結(jié)果： 1.兩組治療前后GSRS-C評分比較 試驗組患者治療前的GSRS-C評分為21.62±4.37,治療后該評分為7.43±3.52；對照組患者治療前的GSRS-C評分為23.43±5.46,治療后該評分為14.13±2.51。治療后試驗組與對照組患者的GSRS-C評分與治療前相比,均有明顯下降(P0.05)；與對照組相比,試驗組患者治療后的GSRS-C評分較治療前下降更明顯(P0.05)。兩組治療后癥狀療效相比,試驗組為93.75%,對照組為78.13%,試驗組較對照組明顯升高(P0.05)。 2.兩組治療前后HAD評分北較 試驗組患者治療前的HAD (A)評分為12.14±4.30,治療后該評分為4.43±2.62；試驗組患者治療前的HAD (D)評分為15.74±3.20,治療后該評分為6.36±3.81；對照組患者治療前的HAD (A)評分為12.52±4.76,治療后該評分為8.34±3.61；對照組患者治療前的HAD (D)評分為15.25±2.85,治療后該評分為10.41±4.18。治療后試驗組與對照組患者的HAD評分與治療前相比,均有明顯下降(P0.05)；與對照組相比,試驗組患者治療后的HAD評分較治療前下降更明顯(P0.05)。 3.兩組治療前后EQ-5D評分比較 試驗組患者治療前的EQ-VAS評分為67.35±3.36,治療后該評分為87.53±3.74；試驗組患者治療前的EQ-5D評分為0.552±0.019,治療后該評分為0.804±0.021；對照組患者治療前的EQ-VAS評分為66.43±4.31,治療后該評分為76.34±3.61；對照組患者治療前的EQ-5D評分為0.560±0.015,治療后該評分為0.708±0.022。治療后試驗組與對照組患者的EQ-VAS、EQ-5D評分與治療前相比,均有明顯上升(P0.05)；與對照組相比,試驗組患者治療后的HAD評分上升較治療前更明顯(P0.05)。 研究結(jié)論： 1.本研究顯示,埃索美拉唑、莫沙必利常規(guī)治療能減輕慢性胃炎患者的胃腸道癥狀,聯(lián)合黛力新治療后,胃腸道癥狀和焦慮抑郁癥狀改善更為明顯。 2.對慢性胃炎伴有精神障礙的患者進行黛力新聯(lián)合常規(guī)治療,能獲得顯著療效,且不良反應(yīng)少,耐受性好。
[Abstract]:The purpose of the study is:
Objective To observe the efficacy of Deanxit combined with esomeprazole and mosapride in the treatment of chronic gastritis (chronic gastritis, CG).
Research methods:
From September 2012 to January 2014, 64 patients with chronic gastritis (CG) in the Department of Gastroenterology, affiliated to the Ji'nan Central Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University, were treated in the Department of Gastroenterology and hospitalization. There were 30 male patients, 34 female patients, 45~67 years old and 58 year old.64 patients were randomly divided into experimental group and the test group. The control group two groups. In the experimental group, there were 14 male patients and 18 female patients. There were 16 male patients and 16 female patients in the control group. There were no significant differences between the test group and the control group (P0.05) by statistical analysis (P0.05). The patients in the test group were given Flupentixol and Melitracen Tablets (Dai Lixin, Danish Danish North). Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., 10.5mg/ tablet), 2 times a day (early, noon), each time 10.5mg; Esomeprazole Magnesium Enteric-coated Tablets (faith, AstraZeneca Pharmaceutical Co., 20mg/), 2 times a day (early, late), each time 20mg; citrate mosapride capsule (Mei Wei Ning, Hisense Company Limited, 5mg/ tablets), 3 times a day, each time 10mg; control group of patients. Esomeprazole Magnesium Enteric-coated Tablets, 2 times a day (early, late), each time 20mg, Mosapride Citrate Tablets, 3 times a day, each time 10mg treatment. The course of treatment was 4 weeks. The patients were banned from eating stimulant food and other drugs that may affect the test during the treatment. Before and after the trial, the two groups were evaluated by GSRS-C, HAD, and EQ-5D, respectively. All patients were recorded in detail during the whole test. The SPSS19.0 software was used to analyze the data in the whole test process, and the measurement data were expressed in the form of mean standard deviation (x + s), and the standard of significant difference was P0.05.
The results of the study:
Comparison of GSRS-C scores in 1. and two groups before and after treatment
The GSRS-C score of the patients in the test group was 21.62 + 4.37 before treatment, and the score was 7.43 + 3.52 after treatment, and the GSRS-C score of the control group was 23.43 + 5.46 before treatment. The GSRS-C score of the test group and the control group after the treatment was significantly lower than that before the treatment (P0.05). Compared with the control group, the test was significantly lower than that of the control group. After treatment, the GSRS-C score of the group was more obvious than that before the treatment (P0.05). Compared with the two groups, the experimental group was 93.75%, the control group was 78.13%, and the experimental group was significantly higher than the control group (P0.05).
2. the HAD score was compared to the two groups before and after treatment
The HAD (A) score of the patients in the test group was 12.14 + 4.30 before treatment, and the score was 4.43 + 2.62 after treatment; the HAD (D) score of the test group was 15.74 + 3.20 before treatment, and the score was 6.36 + 3.81 after treatment, and the HAD (A) score of the control group was 12.52 + 4.76 before treatment, and the score was 8.34 + 3.61 after treatment, and the control group was HAD before treatment. D) the score was 15.25 + 2.85. The HAD score of the test group and the control group after treatment was significantly lower than that of the control group (P0.05) after the treatment of 10.41 + 4.18.. Compared with the control group, the HAD score of the patients in the test group was more obvious than that before the treatment (P0.05).
Comparison of EQ-5D scores in 3. and two groups before and after treatment
The EQ-VAS score of the patients in the test group was 67.35 + 3.36 before treatment, and the score was 87.53 + 3.74 after treatment. The EQ-5D score of the experimental group was 0.552 + 0.019 before treatment, and the score was 0.804 + 0.021 after treatment, and the EQ-VAS score of the control group was 66.43 + 4.31 before treatment, and the score was 76.34 + 3.61 after treatment, and the control group was EQ-5 before treatment. The score of D was 0.560 + 0.015. After treatment, the score was EQ-VAS in the test group and the control group after 0.708 + 0.022. treatment. The EQ-5D score of the test group was significantly higher than that before the treatment (P0.05). Compared with the control group, the HAD score of the patients in the test group rose more obviously than that before the treatment (P0.05).
The conclusions are as follows:
1. the study showed that the routine treatment of esomeprazole and Mosapride could relieve the gastrointestinal symptoms in patients with chronic gastritis. After the combined treatment of Deanxit, the symptoms of gastrointestinal tract and the improvement of anxiety and depression were more obvious.
2. the treatment of Deanxit combined with conventional treatment for patients with chronic gastritis and mental disorders can achieve significant curative effect, with fewer adverse reactions and good tolerance.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：R573.3

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 馬麗華;熊文;高燁;;黛力新不良反應(yīng)誤診誤治2例[J];當(dāng)代醫(yī)學(xué);2011年33期

2 李一云;王維揚;季建林;;從心身角度對慢性胃炎的研究進展[J];國際精神病學(xué)雜志;2007年01期

3 柴晚星;魏鏡;;功能性胃腸病與精神障礙的共病[J];國際精神病學(xué)雜志;2012年02期

4 曹瑞珍;賀俊花;;黛力新聯(lián)合常規(guī)治療伴精神因素慢性胃炎療效觀察[J];北方藥學(xué);2013年04期

5 王震;丁百靜;程珍;李宗先;;氟哌噻噸美利曲辛聯(lián)合胃黏膜保護劑治療慢性胃炎癥狀的療效觀察[J];安徽醫(yī)藥;2013年08期

6 郭禮平;環(huán)雅琴;張玄;趙璨;燕雨晴;劉欣;;消化系統(tǒng)疾病A型行為相關(guān)性探究[J];中國健康心理學(xué)雜志;2011年12期

7 鄭磊磊,王也玲,李惠春;醫(yī)院焦慮抑郁量表在綜合性醫(yī)院中的應(yīng)用[J];上海精神醫(yī)學(xué);2003年05期

8 呂銳;;功能性胃腸病臨床及心理因素分析[J];西南軍醫(yī);2011年06期

9 張蔚;李一云;;對內(nèi)科治療無效的慢性胃炎的心理特征分析[J];內(nèi)蒙古中醫(yī)藥;2013年33期

10 冀麗娟;魏良洲;;氟哌噻噸美利曲辛改善慢性胃炎癥狀的效果[J];齊魯醫(yī)學(xué)雜志;2013年05期

，

本文編號：1802272