| Literature DB >> 35535151 |
Cunxiang Tang1, Wenyuan Pu1, Zhaowei Shan1.
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to study the clinical efficacy of Qibin Tongbian decoction in the treatment of diabetic constipation and its influence on the intestinal environment and the incidence of adverse reactions.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35535151 PMCID: PMC9078779 DOI: 10.1155/2022/5373765
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.650
TCM symptom complex score and clinical efficacy.
|
| TCM score | ||
| Before | After | ||
|
| |||
| Control group | 31 | 33.29 ± 9.25 | 18.28 ± 6.57 |
| Experimental group | 31 | 35.95 ± 7.58 | 12.05 ± 5.25 |
|
| 1.238 | 4.125 | |
|
| 0.220 | <0.001 | |
Clinical efficacy of the two groups (n(%)).
|
| Cured | Markedly effective | Effective | Ineffective | Total efficacy | |
|
| ||||||
| Control group | 31 | 4 | 6 | 10 | 11 | 20 |
| Experimental group | 31 | 9 | 7 | 12 | 3 | 28 |
|
| 5.905 | |||||
|
| 0.015 | |||||
Figure 1Comparison of the FPG levels and 2hPG levels. Note: (a). The abscissa indicates before and after treatment, and the ordinate indicates the FPG level, mmol/L; the FPG levels of children in the control group before and after treatment were 9.36 ± 0.25 mmol/L and 7.06 ± 0.18 mmol/L, respectively; the FPg levels of children in the experimental group before and after treatment were 9.41 ± 0.19 mmol/L and 6.05 ± 0.23 mmol/L, respectively; ∗ indicates that there is a significant difference in FPG levels before and after treatment in the control group (P < 0.05); ∗∗ indicates that there is a significant difference in FPG levels before and after treatment in the experimental group (P < 0.01); ∗∗∗ indicates that there is a significant difference in FPG levels between the experimental group and the control group after treatment (P < 0.001). (b). The abscissa indicates before and after treatment, and the ordinate indicates the level of 2hPG, mmol/L; the 2hPG levels of children in the control group before and after treatment were 13.59 ± 0.43 mmol/L and 11.14 ± 0.52 mmol/L, respectively; the 2hPG levels of children in the experimental group before and after treatment were 13.67 ± 0.54 mmol/L and 9.03 ± 0.55 mmol/L, respectively; ∗ indicates that there is a significant difference in 2hPG levels before and after treatment in the control group (P < 0.05); ∗∗ indicates that there is a significant difference in 2hPG levels before and after treatment in the experimental group (P < 0.01); ∗∗∗ indicates that there is a significant difference in 2hPG levels between the experimental group and the control group after treatment (P < 0.001).
Figure 2Comparison of constipation symptom scores and PAC-QOL scores. Note: (a). The abscissa indicates before and after treatment, and the ordinate indicates the score of constipation symptoms, points; the scores of constipation symptoms before and after treatment in the control group were 19.80 ± 2.03 points and 13.56 ± 1.47 points, respectively; the scores of constipation symptoms before and after treatment in the experimental group were 19.76 ± 3.01 points and 7.6 ± 1.38 points, respectively; ∗ indicates that there is a significant difference in the scores of constipation symptoms in the control group before and after treatment (P < 0.05); ∗∗ indicates that there is a significant difference in the scores of constipation symptoms in the experimental group before and after treatment ( P < 0.01); ∗∗∗ indicates that there is a significant difference in the scores of constipation symptoms between the experimental group and the control group after treatment (P < 0.001). (b). The abscissa represents before and after treatment, and the ordinate represents PAC-QOL score, points; the PAC-QOL scores of children in the control group before and after treatment were 76.44 ± 4.25 points and 49.61 ± 4.30 points, respectively; the PAC-QOL scores of the children in the experimental group were 77.06 ± 5.12 and 38.57 ± 7.41 points before and after treatment, respectively; ∗ indicates that the PAC-QOL scores of children in the control group were significantly different before and after treatment (P < 0.05); ∗∗ indicates that the PAC-QOL scores of children in the experimental group were significantly different before and after treatment (P < 0.01); ∗∗∗ indicates that there is a significant difference in the scores of constipation symptoms between the experimental group and the control group after treatment (P < 0.001).
Comparison of changes in intestinal flora ( ± s).
|
| Bifidobacterium | Enterococcus | Yeast | ||||
| Before | After | Before | After | Before | After | ||
|
| |||||||
| Control group | 31 | 7.45 ± 1.69 | 8.14 ± 1.02 | 7.91 ± 1.26 | 8.48 ± 1.12 | 4.49 ± 0.68 | 3.95 ± 0.58 |
| Experimental group | 31 | 7.46 ± 1.82 | 9.65 ± 1.13 | 7.85 ± 1.29 | 9.37 ± 1.40 | 4.57 ± 0.76 | 3.04 ± 0.23 |
|
| 0.022 | 5.523 | 0.185 | 2.764 | 0.437 | 8.120 | |
|
| 0.982 | <0.001 | 0.853 | 0.008 | 0.664 | <0.001 | |
Comparison of the incidence of adverse reactions (n(%)).
|
| Vomiting | Nausea | Abdominal pain | Total incidence | |
|
| |||||
| Control group | 31 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 9 |
| Experimental group | 31 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
|
| 7.631 | ||||
|
| 0.006 | ||||
Comparison of the recurrence of constipation (n(%)).
| Group | Recurrence | Non-recurrence |
|
| ||
| Control group | 12 (38.71) | 19 (61.29) |
| Experimental group | 3 (9.68) | 28 (90.32) |
|
| 7.123 | |
|
| 0.008 | |