Clinical observation of the efficacy and mechanism of the Wenfei Jiangzhuo formula in lung and kidney deficiency-type vascular dementia

Figures & data

Table 1. Comparison of baseline characteristics between the two groups of patients [n (%)].

Factor		Control group n = 40)	Observation group (n = 44)	t/X^2 value	P value
Sex
	Male	22 (55.00)	25 (56.82)	0.028	0.867
	Female	18 (45.00)	19 (43.18)
Age (years)
	≥65	29 (72.50)	30 (68.18)	0.187	0.666
	<65	11 (27.50)	14 (31.82)
BMI (kg/m^2)		22.15 ± 1.84	22.35 ± 1.66	0.524	0.602
NIHSS score		7.21 ± 4.80	6.84 ± 4.05	0.383	0.703
Smoking history
	Yes	25 (62.50)	29 (65.91)	0.106	0.745
	No	15 (37.50)	15 (34.09)
History of hypertension
	Yes	33 (82.50)	34 (77.27)	0.355	0.552
	No	7 (17.50)	10 (22.73)
Diabetes history
	Yes	32 (80.00)	32 (38.10)	0.611	0.782
	No	8 (20.00)	12 (14.29)
Hyperlipidemia
	Yes	19 (47.50)	20 (45.45)	0.035	0.851
	No	21 (52.50)	24 (54.55)
Degree of education
	≥Junior middle school	19 (47.50)	22 (50.00)	0.052	0.819
	<Junior middle school	21 (52.50)	22 (50.00)
Domicile
	City	26 (65.00)	30 (68.18)	0.095	0.757
	Village	14 (35.00)	14 (31.82)
Patient dementia degree
	Mild	25 (62.50)	30 (68.18)	0.229	0.584
	Moderate	15 (37.50)	14 (31.82)

Table 2. Changes in the MMSE and ADL scores after treatment.

	MMSE score		ADL score
Group	Pre-treatment	Post-treatment	Pre-treatment	Post-treatment
Control group (n = 40)	16.55 ± 2.68	20.84 ± 2.57*	40.39 ± 6.23	47.62 ± 5.31*
Observation group (n = 44)	17.15 ± 2.89	23.84 ± 2.43* ^#	41.22 ± 5.84	52.89 ± 5.10* ^#
T-value	0.984	5.498	0.630	4.638
P value	0.329	0.000	0.530	0.000

*There was a difference between the values before and after treatment (P < 0.05). ^#Indicates P < 0.05 after treatment compared with the control group.

Table 3. Comparison of the differences in MMSE and ADL scores after treatment between the two groups.

Group	MMSE score variation	ADL score variation
Control group (n = 40)	4.02 ± 1.35	6.90 ± 1.84
Observation group (n = 44)	6.96 ± 2.65*	11.24 ± 3.84*
t value	6.309	6.499
P value	0.000	0.000

*There was a difference between the values before and after treatment in the control and observation groups (P < 0.05).

Table 4. Comparison of the efficacy rates between the two groups of patients [n (%)].

Group	Excellence	Effective	Ineffective	Total effective rate
Control group (n = 40)	10 (25.00)	18 (45.00)	12 (30.00)	28 (75.00)
Observation group (n = 44)	20 (45.45)	17 (38.64)	7 (19.91)	37 (84.09)

Table 5. Changes in the MDA and SOD levels after treatment.

	SOD (NU/mL)		MDA (mol/mL)
Group	Pre-treatment	Post-treatment	Pre-treatment	Post-treatment
Control group (n = 40)	72.84 ± 16.72	85.65 ± 15.39*	8.59 ± 2.65	6.98 ± 1.37*
Observation group (n = 44)	73.15 ± 16.22	93.88 ± 14.55* ^#	8.87 ± 3.10	6.10 ± 1.25* ^#
t value	0.086	2.531	0.443	3.079
P value	0.931	0.013	0.659	0.003

*There was a difference between the values before and after treatment (P < 0.05). ^#Indicates P < 0.05 after treatment compared with the control group.

Table 6. Comparison of the differences in MDA between the two groups.

Group	SOD (NU/mL) variation	MDA (mol/mL) variation
Control group (n = 40)	11.18 ± 4.25	2.02 ± 0.63
Observation group (n = 44)	19.18 ± 5.84*	3.02 ± 1.12*
t value	7.117	4.975
P value	0.000	0.000

*There was a difference between the values before and after treatment in the control and observation groups (P < 0.05).

Table 7. Treatment satisfaction in both groups [n (%)].

Group	Very satisfied	Satisfied	Neutral
Control group (n = 40)	12 (30.00)	15 (37.5)	13 (32.5)
Observation group (n = 44)	15 (34.09)	23 (52.27)	6 (13.64)