西藥與傳統中藥在犬皮膚病治療之比較研究

Abstract

本研究主要是觀察犬隻患有皮膚病在使用西藥（Western medicine, WM）及傳統中藥（Traditional Chinese Medicine, TCM）中比較其療效，用以探討中藥B201對於犬皮膚病之治療效果，此外，由於西藥所帶來的藥物副作用日益嚴重故藉以尋找有其療效相似之替代療法。研究對象為家犬共62隻，其臨床症狀表現有紅斑、搔癢、丘疹、水泡、膿皰、糜爛、痂皮、鱗屑、脫毛及色素沉著等，將其記錄於記錄表中。疾病分類主要分為細菌性（膿皮症）、過敏性（異位性皮膚炎）、寄生蟲性及耳道疾病等。給予西藥之治療藥物為抗生素、抗組織胺及糖皮質酮等藥物，劑量之給予則依照藥物處方手冊中建議之劑量，投藥期間為1至3週，期間則進行回診之記錄。中藥治療則給予B201，其劑量為每天每公斤0.4克，投藥期間為2至4週，期間則進行回診之記錄。另外對於中藥無法改善的症狀部份則有配套療法B202，B203及B204來輔助治療。 將所有記錄數據結果以社會科學統計程式（Statistical Program for Social Sciences, SPSS），找出臨床症狀的主症狀。之後利用二因子變異分析法（two wat ANOVA）予以分析並比較中西藥治療效果，使用成對t檢定分析方法（pair t-test）求得已知變異數的平均數以計算出P值，p＜0.05時為顯著差異；p＞0.05時為無顯著差異。 研究結果得知中藥B201對於改善犬紅斑、搔癢及丘疹等主要臨床症狀之程度與西藥治療之結果相似，並無顯著差異（p>0.05）。對於其他臨床症狀（脫毛、膿皰及鱗屑）無法得到滿意改善程度部份在中藥有配套療法來輔助治療則可得到脫毛、膿皰及鱗屑滿意改善程度，反觀西藥治療部份則無相同配套療法。中藥治療期間則無發現其他不適或是藥物副作用情形，顯示中藥在治療此類的皮膚病其安全性是無虞的。故本研究中使用的中藥確實可以用來替代西藥治療，提供臨床獸醫師在治療皮膚病時另外的替代療法。

The aim of this study was to investigate comparative study of western and traditional Chinese medicines for remedy in canine dermatologic disorders, and study TCM B201 therapy efficacy. In addition, the WM have several side effects, and we are try to research the TCM have similarly therapy efficacy to replace WM. Enrolment 62 privately owned dogs showing erythema, papule, pruritus, pustules, erosion, crust, scale, alopecia and hyperpigmentation clinical sign and recording. The classify of disease are bacterial（pyoderma）, allergy（atopic dermatitis, AD）, parasitic and ear problem. Antibiotics, antihistamine and glucocorticoids are major remedy of canine skin disease drugs. The doses are referring to the drug manual and given 1 to 3 weeks and come back every week. B201 is prescription 0.4 g/kg/day 2 to 4 weeks and come back every week. On the other hand, some of clinical sign are not improvement and replace by B202, B203 and B204 to remedies. Collecting clinical sign recording data and use statistical program for social sciences（SPSS）to searching major clinical sign, then use two way ANOVA to analysis WM and TCM remedies efficacy and application of pair t-test to find p value, p<0.05 is mean have significant difference whereas p>0.05 is mean have no significant difference. The result is B201 have alike improvement of major components（erythema, pruritus and papule）compare with WM（p>0.05）. There are no satisfied to improvement other clinical signs（alopecia, pustules and papule）and match with B202, B203 and B204 to assist remedies. Look back WM; there are no matches with drug to assist therapy. In the remedy periods, there are no uncomfortable and any side effect observed and display TCM is safety to remedy these skin diseases. There is no doubt the TCM is assuredness to substitute for WM remedy and provide clinician other remedy choice.