摘要
目的探究依巴斯汀联合盐酸氮卓斯汀鼻喷雾剂治疗常年性变应性鼻炎患者临床疗效。方法选择我院常年性变应性鼻炎患者120例,按治疗方案不同分两组,各60例。对照组采用依巴斯汀治疗,实验组采用依巴斯汀联合盐酸氮卓斯汀鼻喷雾剂治疗,疗程为4周。对比两组临床疗效、治疗前后症状(鼻痒、流涕、鼻塞、喷嚏)评分、不良反应情况。结果实验组总有效率95.00%,高于对照组总有效率85.00%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);治疗后,两组鼻痒、流涕、鼻塞、喷嚏评分降低,且实验组低于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);实验组不良反应率11.67%(7/60)与对照组8.33%(5/60)比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论依巴斯汀联合盐酸氮卓斯汀鼻喷雾剂治疗变应性鼻炎疗效显著,安全性较高。
Objective To explore the clinical curative effect of ebastine combined with azelastine hydrochloride nasal spray in treatment of patients with perennial allergic rhinitis. Methods 120 patients with perennial allergic rhinitis were selected and divided into two groups according to the treatment plan, and 60 cases in each group. The control group were treated with Ebastine treatment, experimental group were treated with ebastine combined with azelastine hydrochloride nasal spray treatment, treatment for 4 weeks. Before and after treatment were compared between the two groups, clinical symptoms （nasal itching, runny nose, nasal congestion, sneezing） score, adverse reaction. Results The total effective rate of the experimental group was 95%, and the total effective rate was 85% higher than that of the control group, and the difference was statistically signifcant （P 〈 0.05）. After treatment, two groups of nasal itching, runny nose, nasal congestion, sneezing score decreased, and the experimental group than in the control group, the difference was statistically signifcant （P 〈 0.05）; The adverse reaction rate of the experimental group was 11.67% （7/60） and the control group 8.33% （5/60）, the difference was not statistically signifcant （P 〉 0.05）. Conclusion Azelastine hydrochloride nasal spray ebastine treating allergic rhinitis with signifcantly higher safety.
出处
《中国继续医学教育》
2018年第6期121-123,共3页
China Continuing Medical Education
