中文摘要：

目的：探讨关节腔注射联合周林频谱仪对类风湿关节炎合并骨关节炎的疗效及护理体会。方法：将本院90例类风湿关节炎合并骨关节炎患者随机分成3组，所有患者治疗前均进行全身情况评估以及相应的常规护理措施．对照A组30例予以玻璃酸钠20mg关节腔内注射，观察A组30例使用玻璃酸钠关节腔内注射联合周林频谱仪患处照射，平均时间（19±4．5）min，照射距离以皮肤感觉温热为宜。观察B组30例在观察A组治疗方案基础上实施康复训练。三组均以15d为一疗程，疗程结束后比较各组患者临床总有效率、血液流变学变化情况以及不良反应的发生率。结果：（1）治疗后观察组临床症状总有效率较对照组比较具有统计学差异（P〈0．05），观察组优于对照组，治疗后观察B组临床症状总有效率较观察A组比较具有统计学差异（P〈0．05），观察B组优于观察A组；（2）治疗后三组血流速度（Vs）、平均血流速度（Vd）、舒张末期血流速度（Vm）均较治疗前升高（P〈0．05），其中观察组升高幅度较对照组明显（P〈0．05）；观察组中观察B组优于观察A组（P〈0．05）；（3）三组不良反应发生率比较无统计学差异（P〉0．05）。结论：玻璃酸钠关节腔内注射联合周林频谱仪对类风湿关节炎合并骨关节炎疗效肯定，能快速改善患者临床症状，科学良好的康复护理干预是促进疗效的关键。

英文摘要：

Objective： To discuss the curative effect and the nursing experience of the articular cavity injection in combination with Zhou Lin frequency spectrograph for rheumatoid arthritis combined with osteoarthritis. Methods： 90 cases with rheumatoid arthritis （RA） and osteoarthritis who were treated in our hospital were selected and randomly divided into three groups. All patients were performed the general condition assessment and the corresponding conventional nursing measures before the treatment.30 cases in Group A got intra articular injection of sodium hyaluronate with 20 mg; 30 cases of the Observation Group A had intra articular injection of sodium hyaluronate combined with Zhou Lin frequency spectrograph affected part irradiation, the average time was （19± 4.5 ）min, the irradiation distance with warm was advisable for skin. Another 30 cases of the Observation Group B were implemented with the rehabilitation training which was based on the therapeutic schedule of the Observation Group A. The treatment time was fifteen days of the three groups. Then the total effective rate, changes of hemorheology and the incidence of adverse reactions of patients were compared and analyzed among different groups after the treatment. Results： （1）There was statistically significant difference between the observation group and the control group about the total effective rate of clinical symptoms after treatment （P〈0.05）; There was statistically significant difference between Observation Group B and the Observation Group A about the total effective rate of clinical symptoms after treatment （P〈0.05）; （2） The blood flow velocity （Vs）, mean blood flow velocity （Vd）, end-diastolic blood flow velocity （Vm） of the three groups were higher than before （P〈0.05）; the ascending range of the observation group was significantly higher than that of the control group （P〈0.05）; Observation Group B was superior to Group A （P〈0.05）; （3）There was no statistically significant diffe