两组有效率比较差异有非常显著性（P＜0.01）。
The stastical difference was very obviously before treatment and after treatment. (P<0.01).
结果：随机对照的两组患者一般情况可比，两组有效率均为100％，均未发现不良反应；
RESULTS: YTT group was comparable with control group in general conditions. The effective rates of both groups were 100% without ADRs.
结果治疗组有效率94 % ，对照组有效率73% ，经统计学处理两组有效率差异显著。
Results The effective rate (94% vs 73%) of the therapeutic group and the control group were significantly different.
两组有效率以及治愈率均无统计学意义（P>0.05），胃肠道反应发生率两组差异无显著性（P>0.05）。
There no significant differences in cure rates, effective rate and gastrointestinal reaction rate between the two groups were observed(P>0.05).
结果：治疗组有效率为96.5%，对照组有效率为94.5%，两组有效率比较，差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）；
Results:The effective rate of the treatment group was 96.5%, and the control group was 94.5%, there was no significant difference in two groups(P>0.05);
结果：治疗总有效率和平均退热时间，两组比较均差异非常显著（P<0.01）。
Results Comparing with the total treatment efficiency and average defervescence time of the two groups, there exists distinct difference (P<0.01).
两组间血液学缓解和细胞遗传学缓解总有效率差异均有统计学意义。
Between the two groups, the total effective rates of the hematologic remission and cytogenetic response was significant difference.
结果两组患者的治疗总有效率均为98.33%，但恢复组患者的显效率要高于对照组。
Results Two sets of patients are 98.33% total effective treatment, but restore patients significant efficiency than the control group.
结果：采用穴位透刺预防中风早期瘫肢肌张力增高的总有效率为92.5%，传统组总有效率为67.8%，两组比较有显著差异（P<0.05）。
Results: The total effective rate of the treatment group is 92.5%, the control group is 67.8%. There were significant difference on statistics (P<0.05).
结果：两组病人清洁肠道的有效率相当，但临床认可不同。
Results the bowel cleaning effective rate of the two groups were similar, but the clinical consents were different.
两组基本治愈率和总有效率比较均有显著性差异（P<0.01，P<0.05）。
There existed significant differences in the curative effects and the total effective rates between the two groups(P<0.01; P<0.05).
地图状角膜炎有效率和两组痊愈病例疗程比较无显著性差异（P＞0．05）。
The effective rate of geographic keratitis and courses of treatment of the cured patients were not statistically significant between two groups ( P >0 05).
比较两组的治愈率、总有效率、创面愈合时间、创面缩小率、症状体征、创面分泌物细菌培养以及组织学观察的差异。
The differences on cure rate, effective rate, wound healing time, wound area reduced rate, clinical symptoms, germiculture and histological changes between the two groups were observed.
结果：治疗组有效率和KPS评分改善率均高于对照组，两组间差异有显著性（P<0.05）。
Results: The total effective rate and KPS improvement rate of combined therapeutic group are higher than that of control group, there is a significant difference between the two groups(p<0.05).
将治疗结果经统计学处理发现，两组治疗方案在一次治疗后总有效率有差异。
The result of treatment was deal with and find by statistical, total availability of two teams are differences after one treatment.
两组患者治疗有效率的比较：阿加曲班组有效率91.67%。 奥扎格雷钠组有效率87.50%。
The effective rate of the two groups: The argatroban group is 91.67% and theozagrel group is 87.50%.
结果显示，血浆输注组总有效率为88.61%，血浆置换组为91.18%，两组的总有效率经统计学处理无显著性差异（P>0.05）。
The total effective rate of plasma transfusion group and plasma exchange group were 88.61% and 91.18% respectively. The result was not statistically significant (P >0.05).
结果：治疗组总有效率为88.24%，对照组总有效率65%，两组比较差异有显著性（P<0.05）。
Results: Total effective rate of treatment group and control group was 88.24% and 65%, respectively, with significant differences between groups(P<0.05).
说明两组调脂总有效率及对血脂单项指标调节上疗效相当。
治疗后两组的降压疗效接近，对照组患者的总有效率为80%，观察组的总有效率为85%（P>0.05）。
The effects of decompression were similar in two groups, and the total effective rate was 80% in control group while 85% in treatment group (P > 0.05).
结果吉诺通治疗慢性鼻窦炎组有效率为96.4％，对照组有效率79.3％，两组比较差异有显著性意义（P<0.05）。
Results The effective rate was 96.4% for cases in TG and it was only 79.3% for those in CG, with a significant difference between them (P<0. 05).
结果康复护理组有效率（95%），明显高于对照组有效率（80%），两组相比较差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。
Results The rehabilitation nursing group efficiency (95%), significantly higher than that in control group efficiency (80%), compared the two groups had a significant difference (P<0.05).
两组总有效率比较，差异有显著性意义（P<0.05）。
The total effective ratio of two groups had significant difference(P<0.05).
结果西酞普兰与氟西汀对首发抑郁症均有确切的疗效，西酞普兰有效率95.32%，氟西汀有效率93.49%，两组疗效无显著性差异。
Results Both citalopram and f uxitine had clear curative effects, the effective rates were 95. 32% and 93. 49% respectively, which showed no significant difference .
结果：经1个疗程治疗后，治疗组总有效率81%，对照组总有效率40%，两组相比有显著性差异（P<0.01）。
Result:After one course of treatment, there were significant difference in the curative rate(81% vs 40%, P<0.01) between treatment group and control group.
结果两组总有效率比较，差异有显著性。
Results There was a significant difference in the total effective rate.
对照组110例应用传统疗法以50%硫酸镁湿敷治疗，观察两组静脉炎治愈的平均时间及有效率。
The other 110 patients with phlebitis in the control group were given wet application with 50% magnesium sulphate. The mean time of cure and effective rate were observed.
结果：治疗组总有效率为93.4%，对照组总有效率为73.3%，两组总有效率比较差异有显著性意义（P<0.05）。
Results:The total effect rates in the therapeutic group and control group were 93.4% and 73.3% respectively which with a significant difference (P<0.05).
结果：治疗组总有效率为93.4%，对照组总有效率为73.3%，两组总有效率比较差异有显著性意义（P<0.05）。
Results:The total effect rates in the therapeutic group and control group were 93.4% and 73.3% respectively which with a significant difference (P<0.05).
应用推荐