| Objective: Clinical study of Guizhi plus dragon bone oyster soup in the treatment of alopecia alopecia with liver and kidney insufficiency,and compared with the clinical treatment of alopecia areata,and then provide reference and basis for the clinical treatment of insufficiency of liver and kidney type alopecia alopecia by Chinese Medicine.Methods: 68 alopecia areata patients were randomly divided into treatment group(treated with orally Guizhi plus KEGU oyster Decoction)and control group(oral administration of six ingredients Rehmannia soup),according to their order of treatment combined with random number table,34 cases in each group.Two groups of patients with the observation period was 12 weeks,two groups with 4 weeks of treatment for 1 course of treatment,continuous treatment of 3 courses,each group in the group before and after entering the group at the end of the 4 week,8 week,12 week were tested on two groups of Hamilton Depression Scale(HAMD)score and the evaluation the results were compared,respectively,before entering the group at the end of the 4 week,8week,12 week record lesions integral,secondary symptom score,symptom score,evaluation of efficacy,adverse reactions,monitoring the onset time.The subjects were treated with blood routine,three routine,liver and kidney function and electrocardiogram before and after treatment(to advise patients mainly).All data are set up on the statistical software SPSS19.0 and complete the statistical analysis of all data.Results:(1)Treatment at the end of 4 weeks,the total effective rate between the treatment group and the control group was 67.65% and 58.82%,respectively,the difference of curative effect was not statistically significant(Z=-0.98,P=0.33>0.05);treatment at the end of 8 weeks,the total effective rate between the treatment group and the control group was 82.35% and64.71%,respectively.the difference of curative effect was statistically significant(Z=-2.08,P=0.04<0.05);at the end of the 12 week treatment,the total effective rate of the treatment group and the control group was 91.18% and 70.59% respectively,and the difference of the curative effect was statistically significant(Z=-2.70,P=0.00<0.05).(2)After 4 weeks of treatment,the area of skin lesion in the two groups was obviously better than before treatment;the curative effect of the treatment group was statistically significant(t=17.25,P=0.00<0.05)at the end of the 4week.The difference of curative effect was statistically significant(t=15.29,P=0.00<0.05)at the end of 4 weeks in the control group;the difference between the two groups was statistically significant(t=-0.40,P=0.69>0.05).After 8 weeks of treatment,the area of skin lesion in the two groups was obviously better than before treatment;the treatment group was treated at the end of 8 weeks,the difference of curative effect was statistically significant(t=17.02,P=0.00<0.05);the difference of curative effect was statistically significant(t=15.29,P=0.00<0.05)at the end of 4 weeks in the control group;the difference between the two groups was statistically significant(t=-0.40,P=0.69>0.05).After 8 weeks of treatment,the area of skin lesion in the two groups was obviously better than before treatment;the curative effect of the treatment group was statistically significant(t=17.02,P=0.00<0.05)at the end of the 8week;the difference of curative effect was statistically significant(t=17.78,P=0.00<0.05)at the end of 8 weeks in the control group;the difference between the two groups was statistically significant(t=-2.02,P=0.04<0.05).After 12 weeks of treatment,the area of skin lesion in the two groups was obviously better than before treatment;the curative effect of the treatment group was statistically significant(t=17.25,P=0.00<0.05)at the end of the 12week;the difference of curative effect was statistically significant(t=16.13,P=0.00<0.05)at the end of 12 weeks in the control group;The difference was statistically significant.The difference between the two groups was statistically significant(t=-2.17,P=0.03 <0.05).(3)The secondary symptom scores of the two groups were significantly lower than those before the treatment;the difference was statistically significant(t=9.09,P=0.00<0.05)in the treatment group at the end of the 4week;comparison group in group comparison at the end of 4 weeks,the difference was statistically significant(t=11.60,P=0.00<0.05);at the end of the 4 week,there was no significant difference between the two groups(t=-1.38,P=0.17>0.05);the difference was statistically significant(t=14.79,P=0.00<0.05)in the treatment group at the end of the 8 week;in the control group,there was a significant difference between the groups at the end of the8 week(t=18.18,P=0.00<0.05);at the end of the 8 week,there was no significant difference between the two groups(t=-1.86,P=0.07 >0.05);the difference was statistically significant(t=18.40,P=0.00<0.05)in the treatment group at the end of the 12 week;in the control group,the difference was statistically significant(t=19.14,P=0.00<0.05)at the end of 12 weeks;at the end of the 12 week,there was no significant difference between the two groups(t=19.14,P=0.09>0.05).(4)The scores of HAMD in the two groups were reduced after treatment;the difference of HAMD scores between the groups after the first course of treatment was statistically significant(t=-2.33,P=0.02<0.05);after second courses of treatment,the difference of HAMD scores was statistically significant(t=-4.36,P=0.00<0.05),and the HAMD score of the group after third courses of treatment was compared,the difference was statistically significant(t=-4.95,P=0.00<0.05).After the first course of treatment,the HAMD score in the treatment group was compared with that in the group before the treatment,The difference was statistically significant(t1=14.87,P1=0.00<0.05);after second courses of treatment in the treatment group,the difference was statistically significant(t2=18.56,P2=0.00<0.05),and the HAMD score was compared with that in the group before treatment;after third courses of treatment,the HAMD score was compared with that in the group before treatment(t3=19.75,P3=0.00 < 0.05).After the first course of treatment,the HAMD score in the control group was compared with that in the group before the treatment.the difference was statistically significant(t1=18.87,P1=0.00<0.05);tfter second course of treatment,the HAMD score of the control group was compared with that in the group before the treatment.The difference was statistically significant(t2=26.38,P2=0.00<0.05);After third courses of treatment in the control group,the HAMD score was compared with that in the group before the treatment.the difference was statistically significant(t3=30.16,P3=0.00 <0.05).(5)The two groups were compared,with statistical t test,t=-3.11,P<0.05,the difference was statistically significant.Conclusion: The clinical symptoms of Guizhi keel Oyster Soup Decoction effectively improve liver and kidney deficiency type of alopecia areata,skin lesions and secondary symptom score decreased significantly,shorten the onset time,stable curative effect,good safety,no obvious adverse reactions,it is worthy of clinical application;Guizhi keel oyster decoction can relieve depression in patients with alopecia areata. |
PDF Full Text Request