| Objective:The clinical efficacy of the tonsil-pecking method combined with Yiqi pus drainage decoction plus reduction in the treatment of chronic tonsillitis with heat in the lung and stomach was observed and compared with the subjects treated with Yiqi pus drainage decoction alone and the tonsil-pecking method to analyze the advantages and disadvantages of combining internal Chinese medicine and external tonsil-pecking method and and applying them alone,so as to expand the ideas and provide reference for the clinical treatment of chronic tonsillitis with heat in the lung and stomach.Methods:Ninety patients were selected from the Department of Otolaryngology,Yunnan Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine,who were diagnosed as having chronic tonsillitis in Western medicine,and Chronic tonsillitis with heat in the lung and stomach as identified by Chinese medicine,with hypertrophy of the tonsils of degree II or above.Randomly divided into 3 groups: Chinese medicine pecking treatment combination group,Chinese medicine group and pecking treatment group,each group had 30 patients and treated for 2 courses of treatment.The clinical efficacy of each group was counted,and the changes in the TCM symptoms and signs of each group before and after treatment were compared and analysed to evaluate the clinical efficacy and respective therapeutic advantages of the combination of internal and external treatments and the use of TCM alone in the treatment of chronic tonsillitis with heat in the lung and stomach.Results:1.Equilibrium analysis of data: The differences between the three groups of subjects in terms of gender,age,duration of illness,single symptom score before treatment and total score before treatment were not statistically significant(all P values > 0.05)and were comparable.2.Clinical efficacy analysis: the total clinical treatment efficiency of the combined Chinese medicine and pecking treatment group was 91.9%,the total clinical treatment efficiency of the Chinese medicine group was 72.7%,and the total clinical treatment efficiency of the pecking treatment group was 70.6%;the difference in the total clinical treatment efficiency between the groups was significant(P < 0.001);among them,the difference in the total clinical treatment efficiency between the Chinese medicine and pecking treatment groups was not statistically The difference was not statistically significant(P>0.05).3.Comparison of symptom and sign scores:(1)when comparing the single symptom scores of each group before and after treatment,the differences were statistically significant(all P values < 0.05).(2)when comparing the total TCM symptom and sign scores of each group after treatment,the differences were significant(P < 0.001);among them,when comparing the total scores of the TCM group and the pecking treatment group after treatment,the differences were not statistically significant(P > 0.05).4.Comparison of the decrease in points:(1)When comparing the decrease in total points of each group after treatment,the difference was significant(P<0.001);among them,the difference was not statistically significant(P>0.05)when comparing the decrease in total points of the Chinese medicine group and the pecking treatment group.(2)When comparing the decrease in points of each group in the treatment of sore throat,tonsillar discharge and bad breath,the difference was significant(all P values < 0.001);when comparing the decrease in points of the treatment of tonsillar congestion and swelling,dry throat,night snoring,foreign body sensation and stool,the difference was statistically significant(all P values<0.001).when comparing the decrease in points in the treatment of tonsillar congestion and swelling,dry throat and itching,snoring at night,foreign body sensation and stool,the difference was statistically significant(all P values <0.05);when comparing the decrease in points in the treatment of follicular hyperplasia and lymph node enlargement in the posterior pharyngeal wall,the difference was not statistically significant(all P values >0.05).Conclusion :1.The clinical efficacy of the combination of the tonsil-pecking method and Yiqi pus drainage decoction in treating chronic tonsillitis of the lung-gastric type is significantly better than that of internal Chinese medicine alone and the external tonsil-pecking method.There was no significant difference in the total clinical efficacy rate between the oral Yiqi pus drainage decoction alone and the tonsil-pecking method alone,but there were different advantages of the two treatment methods.2.Treatment advantages of each group:(1)The tonsil-pecking method combined with Yiqi pus drainage decoction is significantly more effective than oral Yiqi pus drainage decoction and the tonsil-pecking method alone in treating sore throat,congested and swollen tonsils,nighttime snoring,tonsillar discharge,dry and itchy throat,foreign body sensation in the throat,bad breath and stools.(2)In the treatment of dry and itchy throat,foreign body sensation in the pharynx and stool,the clinical efficacy of oral Yiqi pus drainage decoction is significantly better than using the tonsil-pecking method.(3)In the treatment of enlarged tonsils and nocturnal sleep snoring,the clinical efficacy of the tonsil-pecking method is significantly better than that of the oral Yiqi pus drainage decoction.(4)In the treatment of sore throat,tonsillar discharge,halitosis,follicular hyperplasia of the posterior pharyngeal wall and enlarged lymph nodes in the neck,there was no significant difference in clinical efficacy between oral Yiqi pus drainage decoction and the tonsil-pecking method.(5)There was no significant difference in the clinical efficacy of the three treatment regimens in the treatment of follicular hyperplasia of the posterior pharyngeal wall and cervical lymph node enlargement.3.The combination of the external tonsil-pecking method and the oral Yiqi pus drainage decoction in the treatment of chronic tonsillitis of the pulmonary and gastric type has remarkable efficacy,with no significant adverse reactions and toxic side effects,and the tonsil-pecking method does not require anesthesia and is easy to operate. |
PDF Full Text Request