【摘要】 目的 总结慢性阻塞性肺疾病（chronic obstructive pulmonary disease，COPD） 患者院外用药情况，并分析其院外用药情况、痰真菌检出率以及激素不良反应发生率的变化。 方法 调查2011年1-6月住院的161 例COPD 患者院外用药情况，将其分为遵医嘱使用糖皮质激素组（A组，包括口服和吸入激素）、使用非准字号药物组（B组）和未使用以上两种药物组（C组），对各组的痰真菌检出率进行统计学分析，并对A、B组激素不良反应的发生率进行分析。再将现阶段的调查结果与2006年同样研究结果进行比较。 结果 161例患者中使用口服糖皮质激素6例，使用吸入激素29例，使用非准字号药物32例，未使用以上两种药物94例。痰真菌检出率情况:B组检出率为62.5%，明显高于A组的17.14%、C组的27.66%；组间比较有统计学意义（Plt;0.001）。B组的药物不良反应发生率为37.5%；A组中口服激素发生率为50%，而使用吸入激素发生率为0%。与2006年同样研究结果比较，B组患者的比例明显下降，A组患者明显增多。 结论 使用非准字号药物的患者，真菌感染的危险性及激素不良反应的发生率较高，健康教育对于减少这些不良现象的发生发挥了重要作用。【Abstract】 Objective To investigate the use of drugs in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) outside the hospital, and analyze the detection rate of fungus and the side effects of glucocorticosteroids (GCs), and their changes. Methods We investigated the drugs used outside the hospital in 161 patients with stable COPD between January and June 2011, who were divided into prescribed medication GCs group (group A, including oral GCs group and inhaled GCs group), drugs without authorization by SFDA (DWAS) group (group B) and other drugs group (group C). Then we made a statistical analysis on the detection rate of fungus, and the incidence rate of the side effects of GCs in the three groups. Finally we compared the present findings with the similar studies five years ago. Results Among the 161 patients, 6 took oral GCs, 29 used inhaled GCs, 32 used DWAS, and 94 used other drugs. The detection rate of fungus in group B was 62.5%, obviously higher than the other groups (17.14% in group A, and 27.66% in group B, Plt;0.05). The rate of side effects of GCs in group B was 37.5%, and 50% in oral GCs group, while no side effects of GCs was found in the inhaled GCs group. Compared with the similar study five years ago, the use of DWAS decreased, and the use of prescribed medication GCs among the patients increased significantly. Conclusions Patients taking DWAS have a high incidence rate of mycotic infection and side effects of GCs. Health education plays an important role in reducing the occurrences of these undesirable phenomena.
Objective To systematically review the clinical effectiveness and safety of Lianhuaqingwen capsule in the treatment of influenza. Methods Databases including MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library, PubMed, VIP, WanFang Data, CNKI and CBM were searched to collect the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on Lianhuaqingwen capsule treating influenza published from 2000 to 2011. The studies were screened according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the data were extracted, the quality of the included RCTs was assessed, and meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.0 software. Results Among 12 RCTs included, 11 were in Chinese and 1 was in English. The results of meta-analyses based on stratified therapeutic strategies showed that: a) Lianhuaqingwen caspule vs. other traditional Chinese medicinals (TCM): A total of 5 RCTs were included. Compared with the Lingyangganmao capsule, significant differences were found in the clinically marked effective rate (RR=1.32, 95%CI 1.15 to 1.52), the marked effective rate of temperature (RR=1.31, 95%CI 1.10 to 1.55), and the time of defervescence (RR=3.98, 95%CI –4.81 to –3.15); compared with the Kugan granules, significant differences were found in the clinically marked effective rate (RR=1.33, 95%CI 1.08 to 1.64) and the marked effective rate of temperature (RR=1.58, 95%CI 1.20 to 2.09); compared with the TCM decoction, the time of defervescence was significantly different (WMD=5.52, 95%CI 0.32 to 10.72); and b) Lianhuaqingwen capsule vs. western drugs: A total of 9 RCTs were included. Compared with ribavirin, the clinically marked effective rate was significantly different (RR=1.52, 95%CI 1.15 to 2.02); compared with Phosphate oseltamivir, the clinically marked effective rate was not significantly different (RR=0.96, 95%CI 0.77 to 1.18), and the WMDs (95%CI) of such indexes as the time of defervescence, the duration of cough, sore throat, myalgia, expectoration and headache, and the time of viral shedding were –4.50 (–8.83, –0.17), –10.38 (–13.89, –6.87), –13.92 (–19.81, –8.04), –16.44 (–26.50, –6.39), –10.80 (–18.98, –2.63), –9.24 (–17.92, –0.57), and 1.39 (–7.24, 10.02), respectively. Except for the time of viral shedding, all the other indexes showed significant differences between the two groups. No obvious adverse reactions related to Lianhuaqingwen capsule were reported. Conclusion Current evidence shows that Lianhuaqingwen capsule is more effective than other Chinese medicinals and western drugs in alleviating flu-like symptoms when treating influenza. Due to the low methodological quality of the included RCTs, more high-quality large-scale RCTs need to be conducted to verify this conclusion.
Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) in treatingchronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in a stable stage. Methods We searched MEDLINE (1950 to July 2008), PubMed (1996 to July 2008), VIP (1989 to July 2008), WanFang (1998 to July 2008), CNKI (1979 to July 2008), and CBM (1978 to July 2008)for randomized control trials about TCM to treat stable COPD. Trial screening, quality assessment of included trials, and data extract were conducted. Statistical analysis was conducted by using RevMan 4.2.7 software. Results A total of 30 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the Chinese language were identified. No pooled analysis was performed because of the significant heterogeneity among the included trials. (1) For TCM alone versus blank therapy or placebo: 3 RCTs reported the clinical effective rate and only 1 indicated TCM was more effective; 5 RCTs reported forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1)% after treatment and 2 indicated TCM alone as more effective in improving lung function; 4 RCTs reported quality of life after therapy and 2 indicated TCM alone was more effective in improving quality of life after therapy. (2) For integrated tradtional and western medicine versus western medicine alone: 11 RCTs included the clinical effective rate, 3 RCTs showed that integrated traditional and western medicine was more effective. Of 8 RCTs reporting FEV1%, 2 RCTs suggested that integrated traditional and western medicine was more effective. There were 3 RCTs studying 6 minute walking distance and 4 RCTs about quality of life, which also showed that integrated traditional and western medicine was more effective. No obvious adverse reaction to TCM was reported.Conclusions The current evidence shows TCM tends to relieve the symptoms and improve quality of life for patients with stable COPD without obvious adverse reaction. Due to the low methodological quality of trials included, more RCTsof high quality and large scale are required.