论文部分内容阅读
目的:重点探索采用阿司匹林和氯吡格雷两种药物治疗急性心肌梗死的医学价值。方法:挑选的研究对象是2013年春至2015年春在我院接受治疗的86例急性心肌梗死患者,将急性心肌梗死患者分成三组,单独采用阿司匹林药物治疗39例对照组,采用氯吡格雷治疗8例观察A组(合并活动性上消化道出血),采用阿司匹林和氯吡格雷两种药物治疗39例观察B组(并未合并活动性上消化道出血),对比不同治疗方案对急性心肌梗死患者的影响。结果:对照组的治疗效果稍差,有效率仅仅达到76.92%,稍低于观察A组的75.0%,明显低于观察B组的97.44%。观察B组的有效率显然优于对照组、观察A组。对照组的患者的满意度仅仅达到74.36%。观察A组的的患者满意度为75.0%,观察B组的患者满意度却高达94.49%。观察B组的患者满意度显著高于对照组,观察A组。结论:采用阿司匹林和氯吡格雷两种药物治疗急性心肌梗死的有效性较高,值得推荐。
Objective: To explore the medical value of using aspirin and clopidogrel in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction. METHODS: Selected subjects were 86 patients with acute myocardial infarction who were treated in our hospital from the spring of spring until the spring of 2015, and were divided into three groups. 39 patients in the control group were treated with aspirin alone and clopidogrel 8 Cases of group A (combined with active upper gastrointestinal bleeding), the use of aspirin and clopidogrel two drugs 39 cases observed in group B (without active upper gastrointestinal bleeding), compared with different treatment options for patients with acute myocardial infarction Impact. Results: The treatment effect of the control group was slightly worse, the effective rate was only 76.92%, slightly lower than that of the observation group A 75.0%, significantly lower than the observation group B 97.44%. Observe the efficiency of group B is obviously better than the control group, observation group A. Satisfaction of patients in the control group reached only 74.36%. The satisfaction of patients in group A was 75.0%. The satisfaction of patients in group B was 94.49%. Patient satisfaction observed in group B was significantly higher than that in control group, and group A was observed. Conclusion: Aspirin and clopidogrel two kinds of drugs in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction is highly effective, it is recommended.