| ObjectiveTo evaluate the different curative effect caused by the different treatment time by observing the change of clinical indicators of Yifei Moxibustion in patients with stable COPD during the treatment period and select the relative suitable treatment time for the patients with COPD so as to further optimize the technique in TCM nursing operation of Yifei Moxibustion.MethodsSAS was used to randomly divide 120 subjects into two groups:group A and B,with 60 individuals in each group.All patients were given health education,western medicine,and Yifei Moxibustion.The time of each Yifei Moxibustion treatment was 1.5h in group A,and the group B was 2 h.This treatment was given every 15 days and 6 sessions were given as a course of a treatment: In this part of the treatment,the following indicators were recorded and observed once a month :the frequency of colds,mMRC,6MWD,clinical signs and symptoms records,CAT,pulmonary function,skin sensitivity and VAS;The blood routine,urine routine,liver and renal function and electrocardiogram were performed before and at 3months of treatment.Use SPSS 19.0 to analyze.ResultsIn total,120 patients were covered,29 patients were abscised,and 91 patients met the protocol.There were 47 patients in group A and 44 patients in the group B.There was no significant statistical difference in baseline data before they were treated.1 Frequency of colds: The differences of the two groups' frequency of colds had no statistical significance(P>0.05),and the materials had good comparability;There were group effects(F=4.040,P=0.047)and time effects(F=80.566,P<0.001)in frequency of colds with repeated measurements at various time-points between the two groups,and there was significant interaction effect(F=0.392,P=0.728)between time and group;There was no statistical significance before and at 1,2 and3 months after treatment between the two groups(P>0.05);Group A was better than that of group B in decreasing frequency of colds for group A catched less colds than B group.2 Clinical Symptom Integral: The differences of the two groups' chest congestion had no statistical significance(P>0.05),and the aterials had good comparability;There were group effects(F=0.832,P<0.001)and time effects(F=13.047,P<0.001)in chest congestion with repeated measurements at various time-points between the two groups,there wasn't significant interaction effect(F=0.392,P=0.728)between time and group;There was no statistical significance in chest congestion before and at 1,2 and 3 months after treatment between the two groups(P>0.05);Group A was better than that of group B in relieving the chest congestion.The differences of the two groups' cough,expectoration,wheeze,shortness of breath,fatigue,cyanosis and total symptom score had no statistical significance(P>0.05),and the materials had good comparability;There were time effects(P<0.001)but no group effects(P>0.05)in cough?expectoration?wheeze?shortness of breath?fatigue?cyanosis and total symptom score with repeated measurements at various time-points between the two groups,while there weren't significant interaction effect(P>0.05)between time and group;There was no statistical significance in cough?expectoration?wheeze?shortness of breath?fatigue?cyanosis and total symptom before and at 1,2 and 3 months after treatment between the two groups(P>0.05).3 MMRC: The differences of the two groups' mMRC had no statistical significance(P>0.05),and the materials had good comparability;There were time effects(F=15.420,P<0.001)but no group effects(F=0.751,P=0.392)in mMRC with repeated measurements at various time-points between the two groups,while there wasn't significant interaction effect(F=0.334,P=0.710).between time and group;There was no statistical significance before and at 1,2 and 3 months after treatment in mMRC between the two groups(P>0.05).4 6MWD: The differences of the two groups' 6MWD had no statistical significance(P>0.05),and the materials had good comparability;There were timeeffects(F=4.969,P=0.016)but no group effects(F=2.845,P=0.098)in 6MWD with repeated measurements at various time-points between the two groups,while there wasn't significant interaction effect(F=0.973,P=0.362)between time and group;There was no statistical significance before and at 1,2 and 3 months after treatment in 6MWD between the two groups(P>0.05).5 CAT: The differences of the two groups' CAT had no statistical significance(P>0.05),and the materials had good comparability;There were group effects(F=4.774,P=0.031)and time effects(F=106.130,P<0.001)in CAT with repeated measurements at various time-points between the two groups,there wasn't significant interaction effect(F=2.168,P=0.135)between time and group;There was no statistical significance before and at1 and 3 months after treatment in CAT(P>0.05)while at 2 months there was(P<0.05);Group A was better than that of group B in improving the life quality.6 Pulmonary Function: The differences of the two groups' Pulmonary function including FVC?FEV1 and FEV1%had no statistical significance(P>0.05),and the materials had good comparability;There was no significant difference after treatment in FVC ? FEV1 and FEV1 % no matter within or between groups(P>0.05).7 Skin Sensitivity: There were sensitization both in group A and B at 1month after treatment.The sensitization rates were 10% in B group,and the group A were 3.57%.There was no significant difference in sensitization rate between two groups(?2=0.271,P=0.673),and the sensitivity level was I and weak both in two groups.8 VAS: The differences of the two groups' VAS had no statistical significance(P>0.05),and the materials had good comparability;There were group effects(F=4.292,P=0.041)and time effects(F=83.557,P<0.001)in VAS with repeated measurements at various time-points between the two groups,there was significant interaction(F=4.111,P=0.033)between time and group;There was no statistical significance at 1 and 3 months after treatment in VAS(P>0.05)while at2 months there was(P<0.05).9 Security Index: The differences of the two groups' indexes including WBC?RBC?Hbc?NE?BUN?Cr?AST and ALT had no statistical significance(P>0.05),and the materials had good comparability;There was no significant difference after treatment in clinical and laboratory indexes including WBC?RBC?Hbc?NE?BUN?Cr?AST and ALT no matter within or between the groups(P>0.05).Conclusion1 It means the treatment both for 2 hours and 1.5 hours of Yifei Moxibustion are safe and effective because the differences were all statistically significant within groups no matter the main curative effect index(frequency of colds)or the secondary efficacy index(cough?expectoration?wheeze?shortness of reath?chest chaign?fatigue?cyanosis ?total symptom score?mMRC?6MWD?CAT and VAS).(P>0.05).2 No statistically significant differences were observed in the comparison between groups,it indicated there was no difference in clinical effect between the two groups.Therefore the patients with 1.5 hours' treatment are less likely to catch colds and more likely to relieve the symptom of chest congestion and pain so they can get a higher quality of life than that of 2 hours'. |
PDF Full Text Request