首页|火针治疗瘙痒性皮肤病的临床效果及安全性分析

火针治疗瘙痒性皮肤病的临床效果及安全性分析

扫码查看
目的 分析火针治疗瘙痒性皮肤病的临床效果及安全性。方法 选取 2021 年 11 月—2023 年 1 月莆田市第一医院康复医学科收治的 50 例瘙痒性皮肤病患者为研究对象。根据不同治疗方法分为火针干预组与非火针干预组,各 25 例。非火针干预组口服地塞米松联合复方冰片炉甘石抑菌洗剂,火针干预组在非火针干预组的基础上给予火针治疗。比较 2 组的临床疗效、瘙痒程度、皮损症状评分、炎症因子水平、不良反应发生率。结果 火针干预组总有效率为 96。00%(24/25),高于非火针干预组的 68。00%(17/25),差异有统计学意义(P<0。05)。治疗 1、4 周后,火针干预组瘙痒程度评分分别为(1。42±0。19)分、(0。34±0。03)分,低于非火针干预组的(1。68±0。21)分、(1。10±0。14)分,差异有统计学意义(P<0。05)。治疗 1、4 周后,火针干预组皮损严重度评分系统(severity scoring of atopic dermatitis,SCORAD)评分分别为(35。57±4。68)分、(15。33±3。59)分,低于非火针干预组的(42。82±6。22)分、(21。75±4。96)分,差异有统计学意义(P<0。05)。治疗 4 周后,火针干预组肿瘤坏死因子(tumor necrosis factor-α,TNF-α)、白细胞介素-4(interleukin-4,IL-4)、降钙素原(procalcitonin,PCT)分别为(2。89±0。64)pg/mL、(2。99±0。58)ng/L、(2。39±0。34)µg/L,低于非火针干预组的(4。31±0。88)pg/mL、(4。31±0。75)ng/L、(3。37±0。25)µg/L,差异有统计学意义(P<0。05)。火针干预组不良反应总发生率为 0,低于非火针干预组的 24。00%,差异有统计学意义(P<0。05)。结论 火针治疗瘙痒性皮肤病的临床效果显著,可缓解瘙痒程度,改善皮损症状,控制炎症因子水平,其安全性良好。
Clinical Effect and Safety Analysis of Fire Needle in the Treatment of Pruritus Skin Disease
Objective To analyze the clinical effect and safety of fire needle in the treatment of pruritus skin disease.Methods A total of 50 patients with pruritus skin disease admitted to the department of rehabilitation medicine,the First Hospital of Putian City from November 2021 to January 2023 were selected as the research subjects.They were randomly divided into the fire needle intervention group and the non fire needle intervention group according to different treatment methods,with 25 cases in each group.The non fire needle intervention group was given dexamethasone combined with compound borneol calamine antibacterial lotion,and the fire needle intervention group was given fire needle treatment on the basis of the non fire needle intervention group.The clinical efficacy,itching degree,skin lesion symptom score,inflammatory factor levels,and incidence of adverse reactions of two groups were compared.Results The total effective rate of the fire needle intervention group was 96.00%(24/25),which was higher than 68.00%(17/25)of the non fire needle intervention group,the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).After 1 and 4 weeks of treatment,the itching degree scores of the fire needle intervention group were(1.42±0.19)points and(0.34±0.03)points,which were lower than(1.68±0.21)points and(1.10±0.14)points of the non fire needle intervention group,the differences were statistically significant(P<0.05).After 1 and 4 weeks of treatment,severity scoring of atopic dermatitis(SCORAD)scores of the fire needle intervention group were(35.57±4.68)points and(15.33±3.59)points,respectively,which were lower than(42.82±6.22)points and(21.75±4.96)points of the non fire needle intervention group,the differences were statistically significant(P<0.05).After 4 weeks of treatment,tumor necrosis factor-α(TNF-α),interleukin-4(IL-4)and procalcitonin(PCT)of the fire needle intervention group were(2.89±0.64)pg/mL,(2.99±0.58)ng/L,and(2.39±0.34)µg/L,respectively,which were lower than(4.31±0.88)pg/mL,(4.31±0.75)ng/L,(3.37±0.25)µg/L of the non fire needle intervention group,the differences were statistically significant(P<0.05).The total incidence of adverse reactions in the fire needle intervention group was 0,which was lower than 24.00%in the non fire needle intervention group,the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).Conclusion The clinical effect of fire needle treatment on pruritus skin disease is significant,relieving the degree of itching,improving skin lesion symptoms,controlling inflammatory factor levels,and its safety is good.

pruritus skin diseasefire needleitching degreeskin lesion symptom scoreinflammatory factor levelssafety

郭一琼、赵秀婷、陈惠霞

展开 >

莆田市第一医院康复医学科,福建 莆田 351100

瘙痒性皮肤病 火针 瘙痒程度 皮损症状评分 炎症因子水平 安全性

2024

中国卫生标准管理
《中国卫生标准管理》杂志社

中国卫生标准管理

影响因子:1.374
ISSN:1674-9316
年,卷(期):2024.15(23)