Observational Study
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2020.
World J Clin Cases. Aug 26, 2020; 8(16): 3515-3526
Published online Aug 26, 2020. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v8.i16.3515
Table 1 Bacteria distribution before and one week after Chinese herbal bath treatment [n = 84, n (%)]
GroupTimeStaphylococcus aureusAcinetobacter baumanniiEscherichia coliOthersDetection rate
ABefore Chinese herbal bath15 (38.4)12 (30.8)6 (15.4)6 (315.4)100
One week after the Chinese herbal bath3 (7.7)1 (2.6)0 (0)0 (0)10.26a
BBefore Chinese herbal bath19 (48.7)10 (25.6)6 (15.4)4 (10.3)100.0
One week after the Chinese herbal bath13 (33.3)6 (15.4)4 (10.3)3 (7.7)66.67c
Table 2 Comparison of pain severity scores between the two groups (mean ± SD)
GroupNumber of casesBefore treatment (scores)3 d after treatment (scores)One week after treatment (scores)On day 14 of treatment (point)
A137.3 ± 1.45.2 ± 1.53.8 ± 0.91.8 ± 0.7
B137.0 ± 1.26.4 ± 1.05.2 ± 1.24.5 ± 1.3
t value-2.6243.0756.269
t value1.075---
P value0.30330.02220.0096< 0.0001
Table 3 Changes in the objective parameters of scar assessment in the two groups after anti-scar therapy
Scale score
ParametersGroup A
Group B
1 wk1 mo3 mo6 mo1 wk1 mo3 mo6 mo
Color1.3 ± 0.52.2 ± 0.62.0 ± 0.70.8 ± 0.61.4 ± 0.52.5 ± 0.53.0 ± 0.32.4 ± 0.7
Thickness0.8 ± 0.42.2 ± 0.72.6 ± 1.01.0 ± 0.60.9 ± 0.62.6 ± 0.73.2 ± 0.62.7 ± 0.9
Vascular distribution1.5 ± 0.52.5 ± 0.52.2 ± 0.80.8 ± 0.61.4 ± 0.72.4 ± 0.72.8 ± 0.42.1 ± 0.8
Softness0.8 ± 0.62.7 ± 0.82.8 ± 0.71.2 ± 0.70.7 ± 0.63.1 ± 0.63.9 ± 1.03.8 ± 1.1
Table 4 Changes in patients’ self-rating anxiety scale and self-rating depression scores (mean ± SD)
GroupTimeSASSDS
Group ABefore rehabilitation48.38 ± 5.1161.38 ± 5.54
After rehabilitation21.62 ± 2.42a34.27 ± 4.35a
Group BBefore rehabilitation47.59 ± 6.2758.38 ± 4.75
After rehabilitation38.54 ± 4.66c46.24 ± 6.82c