活血化瘀方联合针灸治疗对脑梗后遗症患者脑血管血液流变动力学及神经功能的影响

目的:探讨血化瘀方联合针灸治疗对脑梗后遗症患者脑血管血液流变动力学及神经功能的影响。方法:选取2016年1月至2017年1月沈阳市第二中医医院收治脑梗后遗症患者120例作为研究对象,对照组61例患者接受针灸治疗;观察组59例患者接受活血化瘀方联合针灸治疗。2组连续治疗30 d。比较2组患者脑血流流变学指标、神经功能评分、中医证候积分、临床疗效。结果:治疗前2组患者脑部平均血流速度、左侧椎动脉血流量、右侧椎动脉血流量、基底动脉血流量比较,差异无统计学意义(P 0. 05)。治疗后观察组患者脑部平均血流速度、左侧椎动脉血流量、右侧椎动脉血流量、基底动脉血流量大于对照组(P 0. 05)。治疗前2组患者NIHSS评分、MMSE评分比较,差异无统计学意义(P 0. 05)。治疗后观察组患者NIHSS评分显著低于对照组,MMSE评分高于对照组(P 0. 05)。治疗前2组患者头晕目眩、语言謇涩、半身不遂、患侧麻木、舌苔白腻证候评分比较,差异无统计学意义(P 0. 05)。治疗后研究患者头晕目眩、语言謇涩、半身不遂、患侧麻木、舌苔白腻证候评分显著低于对照组(P 0. 05)。2组患者临床疗效比较,差异有统计学意义(Z=-5. 626,P=0. 000)。结论:活血化瘀方联合针灸能改善脑梗后遗症患者脑血管血液流变动力学指标,保护神经功能。     

理筋通督手法治疗颈性眩晕临床研究

目的:观察理筋通督手法治疗颈性眩晕的临床疗效。方法:将120例颈性眩晕患者随机分成3组,理筋通督组、传统手法组及安慰剂组。理筋通督组采用理筋通督手法;传统手法组采用传统手法;安慰剂组口服维生素C。结果:理筋通督手法可显著减缓患者基底动脉舒张期最低血流速度(P0.05)。理筋通督组有效率为93.67%,传统手法组有效率为67.5%,安慰剂组有效率为17.5%,3组比较差异有统计学意义(P0.05),理筋通督组明显优于其他两组。结论:理筋通督手法治疗颈性眩晕临床疗效显著。     

Prosthetic treatment in the adult French population: Prevalence and relation with demographic,socioeconomic and medical characteristics

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to estimate the prevalence of dental prosthetic treatment and to investigate the demographic, social, economic and medical factors associated with the use of fixed and removable dentures in a representative sample of adults living in France.MethodsThe data were obtained from the 2002–2003 Decennial Health Survey, a cross-sectional study of a representative sample of the population living in France, which included 29,679 adults. Information was collected by interview. The variables collected were fixed denture, removable denture, age, gender, number of children, area of residence, nationality, educational attainment, family social status, employment status, annual household income per capita, supplementary insurance, chronic disease, eyesight problems/glasses, hearing problems/hearing aids. Multinomial logistic regression models were used to study the relationship between prosthetic treatment and demographic, socioeconomic and medical characteristics unadjusted, adjusted for age and adjusted for all the characteristics.ResultsThe prevalence of prosthetic treatment was 34.6% (95% confidence interval (CI): [34.1; 35.2]) for fixed prosthetic dentures and 13.8% (95% CI: [13.4; 14.2]) for removable prosthetic dentures. We showed a gradient between educational attainment and removable dentures; the odds ratio adjusted for all the variables (aOR) associated with no or primary education compared to post-secondary education was 2.56; 95% CI: [2.09; 3.13]. When annual household income per capita was low, subjects were less likely to report fixed dentures (aOR = 0.68; 95% CI: [0.62; 0.75]) than those with high annual household income per capita. Individuals without insurance less often reported fixed dentures than those with private insurance. Those reporting chronic disease were less likely to report fixed dentures (aOR = 0.87; 95% CI: [0.79; 0.95]) but more likely to report removable dentures (aOR = 1.29; 95% CI: [1.17; 1.43]) than those without chronic disease.ConclusionThis study reveals social, economic and medical inequalities in fixed and removable prosthetic treatment among adults in France.