论文部分内容阅读
目的:比较中西医结合卒中单元与非卒中单元的临床疗效。方法:将1000例脑卒中患者随机分为两组。卒中单元组500例采用中西医结合卒中单元治疗,非卒中单元组500例按传统模式用一般治疗方法进行治疗。观察两组患者入院时及出院时卒中残障评分(按OHS评定)及生活能力评分(按Barthel评定),并最终统计两组患者死亡率。结果:入院时两组患者的OHS评分及Barthel评分相近,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。出院时两组评分均有向愈改变,但卒中单元组患者改变明显,与非卒中单元组比较,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.01),卒中单元组患者死亡率低于非卒中单元组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:中西医结合卒中单元的临床疗效优于非卒中单元组,值得推广。
Objective: To compare the clinical efficacy of Chinese and western medicine in the treatment of stroke and non-stroke units. Methods: 1000 stroke patients were randomly divided into two groups. One hundred and fifty stroke patients were treated with TCM-WM stroke unit, and 500 patients without stroke group were treated by conventional therapy. Observe the stroke disability score (according to OHS) and life ability score (according to Barthel’s rating) on admission and at discharge from the two groups, and finally, the mortality rate of the two groups was observed. Results: There was no significant difference in OHS score and Barthel score between the two groups on admission (P> 0.05). At discharge, the scores of both groups changed more and more, but the patients in the stroke unit group changed significantly. Compared with the non-stroke unit group, the differences were statistically significant (P <0.01). The mortality rate in the stroke unit group was lower than that in the non-stroke unit group , The difference was statistically significant (P <0.05). Conclusion: The clinical efficacy of integrated traditional Chinese and western medicine stroke unit is superior to non-stroke unit group, which is worth promoting.