Copyright
©The Author(s) 2023.
World J Clin Cases. Nov 6, 2023; 11(31): 7610-7618
Published online Nov 6, 2023. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v11.i31.7610
Published online Nov 6, 2023. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v11.i31.7610
Table 1 Comparison of basic data between the two groups, n (%) (mean ± SD)
Group | Number of cases | Age (yr) | Man | Woman | Weight (kg) | Course of disease (mo) | Vitamin D consumption D (ng/mL) | Spring (n) | Summer (n) | Autumn (n) | Winter (n) |
Observation group | 65 | 7.86 ± 1.56 | 35 (53.85) | 30 (46.15) | 25.3 ± 3.18 | 7.6 ± 2.5 | 27.5 ± 5.87 | 15 | 8 | 14 | 28 |
Control group | 65 | 8.36 ± 1.28 | 36 (55.38) | 29 (44.62) | 26.7 ± 3.89 | 6.9 ± 3.2 | 26.8 ± 6.21 | 21 | 10 | 11 | 23 |
χ2 | / | 1.893 | 0.895 | 0.968 | 0.987 | 0.798 | 1.562 | 2.784 | |||
P value | / | 0.562 | 0.256 | 0.527 | 0.332 | 0.189 | 0.636 | 0.546 |
Table 2 Comparison of efficacy between the two groups, n (%)
Group | Number of cases | Obvious effect | Effective | Ineffective | Total effective efficacy rate |
Control group | 65 | 30 (46.15) | 29 (44.62) | 6 (9.23) | 59 (90.77) |
Control group | 65 | 38 (58.46) | 25 (38.46) | 2 (3.08) | 63 (96.92)a |
χ2 | 9.562 | ||||
P value | 0.001 |
Table 3 Comparison of clinical cough score between the two groups
Clinical cough score | Pre-treatment | t | P value | Post-treatment | t | P value | ||
Observation group (n = 65) | Control group (n = 65) | Observation group (n = 65) | Control group (n = 65) | |||||
Cough score | 2.06 ± 1.22 | 2.26 ± 1.63 | 1.067 | 0.287 | 0.56 ± 0.54a | 0.97 ± 0.47 | 3.785 | 0.001 |
Nighttime coughs | 3.16 ± 2.01 | 3.28 ± 1.06 | 1.892 | 0.092 | 1.03 ± 0.25a | 2.89 ± 0.98 | 7.894 | 0.012 |
Table 4 Comparison of pulmonary function between the two groups
Pulmonary unction index | Pre-treatment | t | P value | Post-treatment | t | P value | ||
Observation group (n = 65) | Control group (n = 65) | Observation group (n = 65) | Control group (n = 65) | |||||
MVV (L/min) | 4.26 ± 0.22 | 4.32 ± 0.63 | 1.956 | 0.643 | 7.36 ± 1.54a | 5.97 ± 1.47 | 4.278 | 0.003 |
FEV1 (L) | 1.16 ± 0.21 | 1.28 ± 0.66 | 1.537 | 0.291 | 3.43 ± 1.25a | 1.89 ± 0.98 | 2.089 | 0.014 |
FEV1/FVC (%) | 64.6 ± 5.34 | 65.4 ± 4.65 | 0.958 | 0.452 | 79.8 ± 5.56a | 73.8 ± 5.06 | 2.563 | 0.013 |
PEF (L/s) | 2.23 ± 0.56 | 2.08 ± 0.58 | 1.071 | 0.749 | 3.56 ± 0.78a | 3.05 ± 0.54 | 2.417 | 0.021 |
Table 5 Comparison of inflammatory response between the two groups before and after treatment (mean ± SD)
Inflammatory response index | Pre-treatment | t | P value | Post-treatment | t | P value | ||
Observation group (n = 65) | Control group (n = 65) | Observation group (n = 65) | Control group (n = 65) | |||||
IL-6 (ng/L) | 25.78 ± 5.18 | 25.32 ± 4.63 | 2.132 | 0.097 | 20.36 ± 4.54b | 21.9 ± 5.47 | 1.891 | 0.012 |
IL-4 (ng/L) | 24.6 ± 4.34 | 23.4 ± 3.65 | 1.267 | 0.258 | 20.8 ± 5.56b | 22.8 ± 5.06 | 1.673 | 0.018 |
TNF-α (μg/L) | 1.27 ± 0.32 | 1.28 ± 0.63 | 1.879 | 0.784 | 0.43 ± 0.25b | 0.89 ± 0.48 | 2.693 | 0.014 |
Table 6 Comparison of T-lymphocytes count between the two groups before and after treatment (mean ± SD)
Group | CD3+ (%) | t | P value | CD4+ (%) | t | P value | CD8+ (%) | t | P value | |||
Pre-treatment Post-treatment | Post-treatment Post-treatment | Pre-treatment Post-treatment | Post-treatment Post-treatment | Pre-treatment Post-treatment | Post-treatment Post-treatment | |||||||
Observation group (n = 65) | 44.6 ± 6.34 | 67.4 ± 4.65 | -8.25 | 0.008 | 29.8 ± 5.56 | 42.8 ± 5.06 | -9.78 | 0.011 | 33.2 ± 5.21 | 25.6 ± 4.89 | 10.6 | 0.012 |
Control group (n = 65) | 44.7 ± 7.32 | 58.8 ± 5.63 | -2.67 | 0.004 | 28.3 ± 5.25 | 38.9 ± 7.48 | -8.96 | 0.012 | 32.7 ± 6.18 | 28.5 ± 5.12 | 9.78 | 0.023 |
t | 1.785 | 2.165 | 0.895 | 2.418 | 0.794 | 0.947 | ||||||
P value | 0.562 | 0.024 | 0.732 | 0.002 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
Table 7 Comparison of immunoglobulin levels between the two groups before and after treatment (mean ± SD)
Group | IgA (g/L) | t | P value | IgM (g/L) | t | P value | ||
Pre-treatment Post-treatment | Post-treatment Post-treatment | Pre-treatment Post-treatment | Post-treatment Post-treatment | |||||
Observation group (n = 65) | 1.26 ± 0.34 | 1.84 ± 0.65 | -7.23 | 0.012 | 9.08 ± 1.56 | 11.8 ± 1.06 | -6.98 | 0.021 |
Control group (n = 65) | 1.27 ± 0.32 | 1.48 ± 0.63 | -9.67 | 0.007 | 9.03 ± 1.25 | 10.9 ± 1.48 | -9.56 | 0.032 |
t | 0.765 | 6.165 | 0.655 | 2.418 | ||||
P value | 0.724 | 0.014 | 0.751 | 0.012 |
Table 8 Comparison of airway anatomical index between the two groups before and after treatment (mean ± SD)
Group | Airway wall thickness(mm2) | t | P value | Total airway wall area(mm2) | t | P value | ||
Pre-treatment Post-treatment | Post-treatment Post-treatment | Pre-treatment Post-treatment | Post-treatment Post-treatment | |||||
Observation group (n = 65) | 2.16 ± 0.46 | 0.84 ± 0.65 | 8.26 | 0.014 | 7.08 ± 0.56 | 3.28 ± 1.26 | 10.98 | 0.011 |
Control group (n = 65) | 2.27 ± 0.22 | 1.98 ± 0.43 | 7.64 | 0.005 | 7.03 ± 0.25 | 4.39 ± 1.68 | 11.56 | 0.006 |
t | 1.762 | 8.135 | 0.398 | 4.468 | ||||
P value | 0.425 | 0.016 | 0.216 | 0.016 |
- Citation: Cao JY, Wang YC, Deng XX. Efficacy of β2-adrenergic receptor agonist combined with corticosteroid in the treatment of children with cough variant asthma. World J Clin Cases 2023; 11(31): 7610-7618
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2307-8960/full/v11/i31/7610.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v11.i31.7610