The Clinical Observation Of Acupoint Heat Sensitization Moxibustion Therapy On Asthma Chronic Persistent Period

ObjectiveTo explore clinical effects of chronic persistent asthma treated by acupoint heat sensitization moxibustion therapy,and investigate the discipline of the therapy, and also to provide scientific basis for treatment program of acupoint heat sensitization moxibustion therapy.MethodsThis study is designed to the same period in randomized controlled clinical experiments in several institutions country-wild. Research for chronic persistent asthma patients which from respiratory and acupuncture out-patient department of Guangdong Provincial TCM Hospital between April 2009 to March 2010.24 appropriate cases were divided into treatment group and control group randomly. Treatment of treatment group(12 cases) with moxibustion therapy on heat sensitization points for 3 months,30 days a course. Treatment of control group(12 cases) with seretide 50ug/250ug (salmeterol xinafoate 50ug/fluticasone propionate 250ug) for 3 months,30 days a course, which produced by Glaxosmithkline Corporation. Observe period lasts for 3 months, follow-up observe period persists 6 months. Observe index:(1) Pulmonary function tests:Peak Expiratory Force (PEF) and Forced Expiratory Volume in the First Second(FEVl), (2) Asthmatic symptomatic score. Observe time points are pretherapy, posttreatment half a month, posttreatment a month, posttreatment 2 months, posttreatment 3 months,3 months after treatment finished,6 months after treatment finished. Estabish databases with Excel of Microsoft Office 2003, debugging run correctly, analyze all data by SPSS 13.0 statistical software package, We compare count data among groups by Chi-square method, comparing measurement data among groups by t-test, comparing several groups measurement data by variance analysis. Standard test:a=0.05.ResultsPatients into 2 groups when the baseline group difference was not statistically significant, comparable. After 3 months treatment, pulmonary function index (PEF) and symptomatic score increased in both treatment group and control group, the differences were not statistical significance(P>0.05). Pulmonary function index (FEV1) decreased in treatment groups but rised in control group, the differences were statistical significance (P<0.05)ConclusionThe results indicate that:in the aspect of improving function index (PEF) and symptomatic score, the effect of treatment group is equal to control group. In the aspect of improving function index (FEV1), the effect of treatment group is worse than control group.