| ObjectiveIn this study, the state of medical methods of assessing the clinical status of type 2 diabetes, given Chinese and Western medicine treatment and psychological intervention, by adjusting the clinical state of the patient, hoping to achieve better control of blood sugar, and the patient can restore good mental health and social purpose function, to provide new ideas and methods for the clinical treatment of diabetes.Method:66 patients met the criteria of type 2 diabetic patients were divided randomly into control group and the state of medical research group, shedding three cases, the final statistics included 31 cases in the control group, western medicine foundation hypoglycemic drugs; test group of 32 patients in the control on a group basis, use of Chinese medicine treatment and psychotherapy. Observation period of 3 months, respectively, before the group, two weeks later, three months after the assessment of glycemic parameters (fasting blood glucose, postprandial 2h blood glucose, glycosylated hemoglobin), Zongshi Self-Rating Depression Scale (SDS), Zongshi self-Rating Anxiety scale (SAS), diabetes-specific quality of life scale (DSQL), Chinese health status Scale (TCM-HSS) score changes.ResultsMedical procedures using state test group achieved good results:1. blood sugar control, the test group and the control group for fasting blood glucose (FBG), postprandial 2h plasma glucose (PBG), glycated hemoglobin (HbAlc) were significantly improve the situation better than before treatment (P<0.05), but the experimental group was significantly better than the control treatment group, the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05).2. The terms of psychological scale, SAS and SDS scale experimental group scored significantly lower than before treatment (P<0.01), and significantly lower than the control group scores (P<0.01). 3. In terms of quality of life improvement, the test group in the physical, psychological, social, treatment, and total score five scores of the previous treatment has significantly reduced (P<0.05) and better than the control group, with statistical significance (P< 0.01), the control group, only the body dimensions than before treatment scored significantly lower (P<0.05).4. Comparison of clinical symptoms in terms of the efficacy of the test group in energy, pain, stool, sleep, physical, emotional and health and other aspects of self-assessment scores are significantly lower than before treatment (P<0.05), and the above-mentioned six areas (except pain items) scores than the control group (P<0.05) after treatment. |
PDF Full Text Request