| Purpose:For exploration of the different dosing-period clinical effect,this study used bismuth quadruple therapy as comparison group,setted different probiotic dosing-period,inspected the differences of clinical symptoms、Hp eradicate rate、 efficacy score、rate of adverse reactions the cost effic iency in treatment period between treatments,and then made solid theoretical basis for this exploration in the next period.Methods: the study used classical PPI quadruple therapy as separate PPI group,used PPI quadruple therapy combined with probiotics treatment(taking drugs in Hp eradication period)as joint group Ⅰ,used PPI quadruple therapy combined with probiotics treatment(taking drugs after 2 weeks of Hp eradication therapy)as joint group Ⅱ,used PPI quadruple therapy combined with probiotics treatment(taking drugs druing period of Hp eradication and 2 weeks after the treat ment)as joint group Ⅲ.Made conclusive judgement of the four groups of treatment in clinical symptoms score,Hp eradication effect,adverse reaction rate and the cost benefit ratio comparison.Result: the results showed that:(1)after two weeks,the clinical symptom scores ofseperate PPI group was 2.21±1.08 mm;then was the joint groupⅠ,its value was 2.08 ± 1.00,no significant difference between them(p = 0.495 > 0.05);jo int group Ⅱ was followed by the joint group,the score was 1.92±1.13,compared with separate PPI、 joint group hadⅠ,there was no significant difference(p = 0.120 > 0.05,p = 0.120 > 0.05);Joint group Ⅲ clinical symptom scores was lowest,1.74 ± 0.89,compared with seperate PPI group,there was significant differences(p = 0.012 < 0.05);compared the joint group ⅠandⅡ,joint group Ⅲ didn’t showed significant difference(p = 0.066 > 0.05,p = 0.066 > 0.05).Effects of diction in the treatment of chronic gastritis and peptic ulcer,joint Ⅲ group on ITT numerical value was 93.44%,higher than 88.71% of the joint group Ⅰ,and showed significant difference(X2 = 4.860,P = 0.0275 < 0.05);Joint group Ⅲ on PP value is 96.61%,higher than 93.22% of the joint group Ⅰ,also showed significant difference(X2 = 6.2403,P = 0.0125 < 0.05).Joint group Ⅱ on ITT numerical value is 91.80%,less than 93.44% of the combined group Ⅲ,showing significant difference between the two(X2 = 5.8824,P = 0.0153 < 0.05),94.92 PP numerical,below the joint group of Ⅲ 96.61,and showed significant d ifferences(X2 = 6.9808,P = 0.0082 < 0.01).(3)the research results ind icate that probiotics joint PPI Ⅰ quadruple therapy scheme,Ⅱ and Ⅲ,these three schemes on the eradication rate,according to ITT analysis,its are 88.71%,91.80% and 88.71% respectively were higher than in single PPI group 82.54%,significant level is not statistically significant,but the confidence level of the three values are less than 0.1.According to PP analysis,three kinds of solution values are 93.22%,94.92% and 93.22% respectively were higher than in single PPI group 88.14%,and both showed statistically s ignificant level.(4)on the adverse reaction during the treatment,the jo int group Ⅰ ratio of 9.84%,less than 28.57% of the PPI group alone,both and have significantly d ifference(X2 = 6.9281,P = 6.9281 < 0.01).Jo int group Ⅱ ratio of 29.03%,28.57% higher than that of PPI group separately,there has no significant difference(X2 = 0.0103,P = 0.0103 > 0.05).Joint group Ⅲ ratio of 11.48%,significantly lower than the PPI group alone,with remarkable significant difference between(X2 = 5.7792,P = 0.0162 < 0.05).Joint group Ⅰ ratio was 9.84%,less than 11.48% of the combined group Ⅲ,there was no significant differences in both(X2 = 0.0557,P = 0.0557 > 0.05);Joint group Ⅱ ratio of 29.03%,higher than 11.48% of the joint group Ⅲ,both with significant difference(X2 = 6.1763,P = 0.0129 < 0.05).on C/E ratio,the seperate PPI group had a better cost benefit ratio;Followed by the joint group Ⅱ,its C/E was 9.24;the last one was joint group Ⅰ,its C/E was 9.41;the C/E performance of the joint group Ⅲ reached 9.81.on △ C/ △ E performance,jo int group Ⅱ showed that it had better consquence in the cost-effectiveness ratio,which was 8.11.Followed by the joint group Ⅰwhich was 9.63;the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of Joint group Ⅲ was 12.34.conclusion:(1)during the treatment procedure of Hp eradication therapy,taken drugs of probiotics and antib iotics accompanyingly in the period of the treatment,could effectively relieved the clinical symptoms,improved the effects of Hp eradication therapy,reduced the ADR occurred frequency.⑵compared with the therapy taken drugs in the treatment,the therapy taken probiotics After the Hp eradication therapy had more benefit effects on Hp eradication;But it couldn’t effectively relieved the clinical symptoms and ADR occurrence frequency during the treatment.(3)taken the probiotics during and after the treatment of therapy,improved the effect of Hp eradication therapy on clinical symptoms of patients,,reduced the ADRS occurred frequency.But in the C/E and delta C/delta E performance was poorer.(4)the research thought that the therapy should be integrated with c linical symptoms of patients,Hp eradication ratio,ADR and cost-effective expectations,build up the ratio between the index relationship,using the means of quantitative analysis for probiotic using comprehensive analys is,and then select out of the most efficient probiotic using solution. |
PDF Full Text Request