本文選題：原發(fā)性癲癇 + 透穴埋線��； 參考：《河南中醫(yī)藥大學》2016年碩士論文

【摘要】：目的:觀察透穴埋線治療原發(fā)性癲癇的近期和遠期療效,及其對癲癇患者服用藥物產生的副作用的改善情況,為原發(fā)性癲癇的患者提供一種方便、有效、安全的治療方法。方法:對入選的31例原發(fā)性癲癇患者采用自身對照方法,觀察為期3個月的透穴埋線治療,治療結束2個月后對患者進行回訪調查。治療結束后參考《癇證診斷與療效評定標準》統(tǒng)計該組患者治療前后及隨訪期臨床癥狀計分,進行統(tǒng)計對比,并在治療前后進行癥狀評估和療效判定。應用SPSS17.0統(tǒng)計軟件進行統(tǒng)計,以分析治療前后客觀指標和臨床癥狀的改變情況并評估遠期療效。結果:1.透穴埋線組總有效率為93.6%,此療法對原發(fā)性癲癇有良好療效;2.治療后,患者的癲癇計分(發(fā)作臨床表現、發(fā)作頻率)較前降低,治療前后差異有顯著統(tǒng)計學意義(P≤0.01),說明該種療法能降低患者癇性發(fā)作的頻率、改善發(fā)作伴隨癥狀如發(fā)作持續(xù)時間、意識狀況等相關癥狀;3.治療結束后2個月對患者進行回訪,此時癲癇計分稍低于治療結束后計分,經檢驗(P0.05),差異無顯著統(tǒng)計學意義。4.該療法對患者由于服用藥物導致的不良反應,如嗜睡、頭痛頭暈、食欲不振等現象有明顯改善作用。結論:1.透穴埋線療法是一種治療原發(fā)性癲癇的科學有效方法,可以降低患者癇性發(fā)作頻率,改善癇性發(fā)作伴隨癥狀;2.從統(tǒng)計結果可以看出,透穴埋線療法對患者由于服用藥物等引起的不良反應的改善方面似乎具有明顯優(yōu)勢;3.隨訪期癲癇計分低于治療結束時計分,雖然差異不具有統(tǒng)計學意義,但仍可認為透穴埋線法具有的遠期療效,并且與西藥治療癲癇要求癲癇不發(fā)作2—3年且不能立即停藥形成對比;4.在可行性方面,透穴埋線易于開展,操作簡單,作用時間長,無明顯副作用,能減少患者的治療頻率,與現代人們的高效快速的生活節(jié)奏相符,患者的依從性較好,值得臨床推廣使用。
[Abstract]:Objective: to observe the short and long term curative effect of catgut embedding in the treatment of primary epilepsy, and to provide a convenient, effective and safe treatment method for patients with primary epilepsy. Methods: 31 patients with primary epilepsy were treated with self-control method. The patients were treated with catgut embedding for 3 months, and the patients were investigated 2 months after the treatment. At the end of the treatment, the clinical symptom scores of the patients before and after treatment and the follow-up period were counted according to the criteria for the diagnosis and efficacy of epilepsy, and the symptoms were evaluated and the curative effects were evaluated before and after the treatment. SPSS 17.0 statistical software was used to analyze the changes of objective indexes and clinical symptoms before and after treatment and to evaluate the long-term efficacy. The result is 1: 1. The total effective rate of the catgut embedding group was 93. 6, and this therapy had a good curative effect on primary epilepsy. After treatment, the epileptic score (clinical manifestation, frequency of seizure) was lower than that before treatment, and the difference was statistically significant (P 鈮，

本文編號：2082027