| Literature DB >> 34956578 |
Qi Sun1, Hanshu Yu2, Yun Shang3, Yan Cao4.
Abstract
Background: Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) treatment is of great importance to improve the clinical symptoms of children with pneumonia, and this study was conducted in this context.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34956578 PMCID: PMC8695006 DOI: 10.1155/2021/8229251
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Healthc Eng ISSN: 2040-2295 Impact factor: 2.682
Comparison of symptom recovery time of child patients between the two groups ( ± s, d).
| Group |
| Fever clearance time | Cough clearance time | Tonsil hyperemia clearance time | Laboured breathing relief time | Lung rale clearance time | Time of lesion disappearance on X-ray chest film |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conventional group | 41 | 3.81 ± 0.76 | 9.67 ± 2.17 | 6.18 ± 1.84 | 3.55 ± 0.74 | 5.17 ± 0.69 | 8.25 ± 1.87 |
| Combined group | 41 | 2.75 ± 0.85 | 7.03 ± 1.97 | 4.27 ± 1.92 | 2.64 ± 0.53 | 4.06 ± 0.73 | 6.53 ± 1.75 |
|
| 5.953 | 5.768 | 4.599 | 6.402 | 7.076 | 4.300 | |
|
| <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
Comparison of TCM symptom scores of children at different moments between the two groups ( ± s, points).
| Group |
| T0 | T1 | T2 | T3 | T4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conventional group | 41 | 25.10 ± 4.68 | 21.36 ± 3.87 | 16.25 ± 2.75 | 9.35 ± 1.72 | 5.27 ± 1.65 |
| Combined group | 41 | 25.14 ± 4.71 | 18.25 ± 3.46 | 12.46 ± 2.89 | 6.53 ± 1.56 | 2.85 ± 1.53 |
|
| 0.039 | 3.836 | 6.083 | 7.776 | 6.886 | |
|
| 0.969 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
Figure 1Comparison of immune indicators of children before and after treatment between the two groups ( ± s). (a) The comparison of IgG level values before and after treatment between the two groups: the horizontal axis indicates before and after treatment and the horizontal axis indicates the IgG level values in g/L; before and after treatment, the IgG level values of children in the conventional group are (5.63 ± 1.23) and (6.23 ± 1.39), respectively; before and after treatment, the IgG level values of children in the combined group are (5.63 ± 1.23) and (9.36 ± 1.47), respectively. IgG level values of children in the combined group before and after treatment are significantly different (t = 12.461, P < 0.001). IgG level values of children in both groups after treatment are significantly different (t = 9.906, P < 0.001). (b) The comparison of IgA level values before and after treatment between the two groups: the horizontal axis indicates before and after treatment and the horizontal axis indicates the IgA level values in g/L; before and after treatment, the IgA level values of children in the conventional group are (1.78 ± 0.63) and (1.64 ± 0.42), respectively; before and after treatment, the IgA level values of children in the combined group are (1.76 ± 0.62) and (1.05 ± 0.34), respectively. IgA level values of children in the combined group before and after treatment are significantly different (t = 6.429, P < 0.001). IgA level values of children in both groups after treatment are significantly different (t = 6.991, P < 0.001). (c) The comparison of complement C3 level values before and after treatment between the two groups: the horizontal axis indicates before and after treatment and the horizontal axis indicates the complement C3 level values in g/L; before and after treatment, the complement C3 level values of children in the conventional group are (2.56 ± 0.47) and (2.38 ± 0.52), respectively; before and after treatment, the complement C3 level values of children in the combined group are (2.54 ± 0.48) and (1.67 ± 0.51), respectively. The complement C3 level values of children in the combined group before and after treatment are significantly different (t = 7.954, P < 0.001). The complement C3 level values of children in both groups after treatment are significantly different (t = 6.242, P < 0.001). (d) The comparison of complement C4 level values before and after treatment between the two groups: the horizontal axis indicates before and after treatment, and the horizontal axis indicates the complement C4 level values in g/L; before and after treatment, the complement C4 level values of children in the conventional group are (1.08 ± 0.23) and (1.02 ± 0.18), respectively; before and after treatment, the complement C4 level values of children in the combined group are (1.06 ± 0.21) and (0.58 ± 0.19), respectively. The complement C4 level values of children in the combined group before and after treatment are significantly different (t = 10.853, P < 0.001). The complement C4 level values of children in both groups after treatment are significantly different (t = 10.764, P < 0.001).
Figure 2Comparison of CPIS scores of children after treatment between the two groups ( ± s). The horizontal axis indicates the combined group and the conventional group, and the vertical axis indicates the CPIS score (points); after treatment, the mean CPIS scores of children in the combined group and the conventional group are (4.46 ± 2.03) and (6.37 ± 2.19), respectively. After treatment, the mean CPIS scores of children in both groups are significantly different (t = 4.096, P < 0.05).
Comparison of changes in serum indicators of children after treatment between the two groups ( ± s).
| Indicators | Combined group ( | Conventional group ( |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IL-8 (pg/ml) | 62.17 ± 5.17 | 75.16 ± 6.27 | 10.235 | <0.001 |
| IL-6 (pg/L) | 36.71 ± 6.75 | 62.15 ± 6.26 | 17.695 | <0.001 |
| CRP (mg/L) | 46.71 ± 4.67 | 72.17 ± 4.18 | 26.011 | <0.001 |
| ESR (mm/h) | 19.28 ± 5.16 | 27.38 ± 5.17 | 7.101 | <0.001 |
Correlation analysis between inflammatory factor levels and CPIS scores of pediatric patients with pneumonia.
| Indicators | CPIS | |
|---|---|---|
| Correlation coefficient |
| |
| IL-8 | 0.706 | <0.001 |
| IL-6 | 0.712 | <0.001 |
| CRP | 0.734 | <0.001 |