目的 比較單純手法復(fù)位和手法復(fù)位合并口服抗眩暈藥治療良性陣發(fā)性位置性眩暈（BPPV）的短期和長(zhǎng)期療效。 方法 將2004年1月－2011年6月期間收治的236例BPPV患者隨機(jī)分為兩組，對(duì)照組112例采用單純手法復(fù)位，觀察組124例在手法復(fù)位基礎(chǔ)上配合口服抗眩暈藥治療，兩組均于1周和3個(gè)月后復(fù)查，并隨訪觀察1年，且比較其療效。 結(jié)果 觀察隨訪1年后，對(duì)照組總治愈率92.86% (104/112），觀察組治愈率為93.54%（116/124），兩者比較差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。 結(jié)論 單純手法復(fù)位和手法復(fù)位合并口服抗眩暈藥治療BPPV其療效相當(dāng)，但可作為BPPV患者的首選治療方法。Objective To evaluate the short-term and long-term effect of canalith repositioning procedures with or without anti-vertigo drugs on benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV). Methods A total of 236 cases of BPPV that were treated with particle repositioning maneuver with medicine treatment from January 2004 to June 2011. The patients were divided into control group (112 patients, underwent canalith repositioning procedures) and observation group (124 patients, underwent canalith repositioning procedures with medication of anti-vertigo drugs). The two groups were reappraised after one week and three months respectively, and the follow-up duration was one year. Results The success rate was 92.86% (104/112) in the control group and 93.55%(116/124) in the observation group one year after the treatment. The difference between the two groups was not significant. Conclusion The effect of canalith repositioning procedures with or without anti-vertigo drugs on BPPV does not differ much from each other.
目的探討視頻眼震圖檢查中溫度試驗(yàn)的合理路徑。 方法對(duì)西安市中心醫(yī)院263例接受視頻眼震圖檢查的患者進(jìn)行回顧性分析。以溫度試驗(yàn)為標(biāo)準(zhǔn)試驗(yàn)，分別計(jì)算并比較單溫試驗(yàn)的靈敏度、假陰性率、特異度、假陽性率。統(tǒng)計(jì)分析采用SPSS 13.0軟件。 結(jié)果全部受檢者中單熱試驗(yàn)的靈敏度為81.7%，較單冷試驗(yàn)高；而假陰性率為18.3%，較單冷試驗(yàn)低，差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（P＜0.05）。在伴有自發(fā)性眼震患者中，單熱試驗(yàn)的靈敏度為90.8%，最高；而假陰性率為9.2%，最低，差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（P＜0.05）。 結(jié)論溫度試驗(yàn)的合理路徑可為按熱刺激患側(cè)、熱刺激健側(cè)、冷刺激患側(cè)、冷刺激健側(cè)的順序進(jìn)行冷熱水（氣）的灌注；若患者不能耐受，可以單熱試驗(yàn)的結(jié)果作為參考。