本文選題：耳鳴 + 風(fēng)池��； 參考：《北京中醫(yī)藥大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：1.研究目的:根據(jù)本團(tuán)隊(duì)前期研究結(jié)果,選取少陽經(jīng)耳周的完骨、耳門、聽會(huì)、翳風(fēng)、風(fēng)池5穴及肘膝關(guān)節(jié)以下的外關(guān)、中渚、陽陵泉、丘墟、足臨泣5穴,將耳鳴組和非耳鳴對(duì)照組以上10穴的壓痛反應(yīng)及其壓痛閾進(jìn)行比較,研究10穴在耳鳴患者中的特異性反應(yīng),為針灸治療耳鳴提供臨床選穴依據(jù)。2.研究方法:選取耳鳴組90例,非耳鳴對(duì)照組30例,分別對(duì)其少陽經(jīng)耳周的完骨、耳門、聽會(huì)、翳風(fēng)、風(fēng)池5穴及肘膝關(guān)節(jié)以下的外關(guān)、中渚、陽陵泉、丘墟、足臨泣5穴進(jìn)行按壓,記錄壓痛反應(yīng)陽性穴位,并采用壓痛測(cè)試儀分別對(duì)上述10穴壓痛閾進(jìn)行測(cè)量。3.研究結(jié)果3.1耳鳴組和非耳鳴對(duì)照組一般情況(1)性別:耳鳴組90例,其中男30例(33.33%),女60例(66.67%),女性耳鳴發(fā)病率高于男性,有極顯著性差異(p0.01);非耳鳴對(duì)照組30例,其中男16例(53.33%),女14例(占46.67%);耳鳴組和非耳鳴對(duì)照組性別比較,無顯著性差異(p0.05),具有可比性。(2)年齡:耳鳴組:年齡最小19歲,最大70歲,平均年齡48.5歲。其中50-60歲年齡段耳鳴發(fā)病率最高,為33.33%,其次為41-50歲,發(fā)病率為21.11%;非耳鳴對(duì)照組:年齡最小19歲,最大61歲,平均年齡43.7歲;兩組各年齡段人數(shù)比較均為p0.05,無顯著性差異,具有可比性。(3)耳鳴患者的病程:0～3個(gè)月者29例(急性耳鳴),3～12個(gè)月者16例(亞急性耳鳴),12個(gè)月以上者45例(慢性耳鳴),其中12個(gè)月以上的慢性耳鳴患者最為多見,發(fā)病率為50.0%。(4)耳鳴側(cè)別:90例耳鳴患者中,左側(cè)耳鳴30例,右側(cè)耳鳴19例,雙側(cè)耳鳴39例,腦鳴2例,以雙側(cè)耳鳴患者發(fā)病率最高,占43.3%。(5)耳鳴嚴(yán)重程度分級(jí):Ⅰ級(jí)41例(45.6%),Ⅱ級(jí)35例(38.9%),Ⅲ級(jí)9例(10.0%),Ⅳ級(jí)5例(5.6%),其中Ⅰ級(jí)病例數(shù)最多,占45.6%。3.2耳鳴組與非耳鳴對(duì)照組少陽經(jīng)10穴壓痛反應(yīng)及其壓痛閾比較(1)10穴壓痛反應(yīng)頻次比較:90例耳鳴患者中,完骨穴的壓痛反應(yīng)頻次為76次(84.4%),非耳鳴對(duì)照組完骨壓痛反應(yīng)頻次為20次(66.7%),耳鳴組明顯高于非耳鳴對(duì)照組(p0.05);其余9穴(耳門、聽會(huì)、翳風(fēng)、風(fēng)池、外關(guān)、中渚、陽陵泉、丘墟、足臨泣穴)與非耳鳴對(duì)照組比較均無顯著性差異(p0.05)。(2)10穴壓痛閾均值比較:耳鳴組的完骨、翳風(fēng)、風(fēng)池、外關(guān)4穴的壓痛閾均值均小于非耳鳴對(duì)照組,有顯著性差異(p0.05);中渚、陽陵泉、足臨泣3穴的壓痛閾均值也小于非耳鳴對(duì)照組,有極顯著性差異(p0.01);其余3穴(耳門、聽會(huì)、丘墟穴)兩組比較,均無顯著性差異(p0.05)。3.3耳鳴患者少陽經(jīng)10穴壓痛側(cè)別分布(1)30例左耳鳴患者中,耳門、聽會(huì)、翳風(fēng)、完骨、風(fēng)池、外關(guān)、中渚、丘墟、足臨泣9穴在雙側(cè)有壓痛反應(yīng)者均高于單在左側(cè)、右側(cè)有反應(yīng)者,有極顯著性差異(p0.01);陽陵泉穴在雙側(cè)有壓痛反應(yīng)者亦高于單在左側(cè)、右側(cè)有反應(yīng)者,分別有顯著性差異(p0.05)及極顯著性差異(p0.01);10穴單在左、右側(cè)有壓痛反應(yīng)者比較,均無顯著性差異(p0.05)。(2)19例右耳鳴患者中,聽會(huì)、翳風(fēng)、完骨、風(fēng)池、中渚、陽陵泉、丘墟、足臨泣8穴在雙側(cè)有壓痛反應(yīng)者均高于單在左側(cè)、右側(cè)有反應(yīng)者,有極顯著性差異(p0.01);耳門穴在雙側(cè)有壓痛反應(yīng)者亦高于單在左側(cè)、右側(cè)有反應(yīng)者,分別有顯著性差異(p0.05)及極顯著性差異(p0.01);外關(guān)穴單在左側(cè)、右側(cè)、雙側(cè)有壓痛反應(yīng)者相互比較,均無顯著性差異(p0.05);10穴單在左、右側(cè)有壓痛反應(yīng)者比較,均無顯著性差異(p0.05)。(3)39例雙耳鳴患者中,耳門、聽會(huì)、翳風(fēng)、完骨、風(fēng)池、外關(guān)、中渚、丘墟、足臨泣9穴在雙側(cè)有壓痛反應(yīng)者均高于單在左側(cè)、右側(cè)有反應(yīng)者,有極顯著性差異(p0.01);陽陵泉穴單在左側(cè)、雙側(cè)有壓痛反應(yīng)者均高于單在右側(cè)有反應(yīng)者,有極顯著性差異(p0.01),而單在雙側(cè)與單在左側(cè)有壓痛反應(yīng)者比較,無顯著性差異(p0.05);除陽陵泉穴外,其余9穴單在左、右側(cè)有壓痛反應(yīng)者比較,均無顯著性差異(p0.05)。4結(jié)論4.1耳鳴組與非耳鳴對(duì)照組比較,壓痛最敏感的穴位是耳后的完骨穴,其次為耳后的翳風(fēng)、風(fēng)池穴,以及肘膝關(guān)節(jié)以下的外關(guān)、中渚、陽陵泉、足臨泣穴,提示這些穴位可以作為治療耳鳴的優(yōu)先選穴4.2無論單側(cè)耳鳴還是雙側(cè)耳鳴,其壓痛頻次大都表現(xiàn)為雙側(cè)高于單側(cè)。提示臨床治療耳鳴可選取雙側(cè)穴位。
[Abstract]:1. research purposes: according to the results of the previous study of the team, we selected the bone of the ear, the ear door, the hearing, the Yifeng, the 5 acupoints of the wind pool and the elbow and knee joints, the middle Zhu, Yang Ling spring, Qiu Xu and the 5 acupoints, and compared the tenderness reaction and the pressure pain threshold of the 10 points above the tinnitus group and the non tinnitus control group, and studied the 10 acupoints in the tinnitus patients. Specific reaction, to provide clinical point selection basis.2. research method for acupuncture treatment of tinnitus: 90 cases of tinnitus group and 30 non tinnitus control groups, which were pressed to record the positive acupoints of pressure pain response, respectively, to press the bone of the ear, the ear door, the hearing, Yifeng, the 5 points of the wind pool and the outside of the elbow and knee joint, the middle Zhu, Yangling spring, Qiu Xu and the foot Lin weeping 5 points. The 10 points of the 10 acupoint pressure pain threshold were measured by the pressure pain test instrument, 3.1 of the tinnitus group and the non tinnitus control group (1) sex: 90 cases of tinnitus group, including 30 men (33.33%) and 60 women (66.67%). The incidence of tinnitus in women was higher than that of men (P0.01); the non tinnitus control group was 30 cases, of which 16 men (53.) were male (16 men (53.). 33%), 14 women (46.67%); there was no significant difference in sex between the tinnitus group and the non tinnitus control group (P0.05). (2) age: tinnitus group: the youngest age 19, the maximum 70 years old, and the average age of 48.5 years. The incidence of tinnitus in 50-60 years of age was the highest, 33.33%, and 41-50 years, and the incidence was 21.11%; non tinnitus control group: age group: age The minimum 19 years, the maximum 61 years old, the average age of 43.7 years, the two groups of age groups are P0.05, no significant difference, there is a comparable. (3) the course of tinnitus patients: 0~3 months, 29 cases (acute tinnitus), 3~12 months in 16 cases (subacute tinnitus), 12 months more 45 cases (chronic tinnitus), among them more than 12 months of chronic tinnitus patients most The incidence was 50.0%. (4) tinnitus: in 90 cases of tinnitus, there were 30 cases of left tinnitus, 19 cases of right tinnitus, 39 cases of bilateral tinnitus and 2 cases of brain ringing. The incidence of bilateral tinnitus patients was the highest, accounting for the severity of 43.3%. (45.6%), 35 cases (38.9%), grade III 9 cases (10%) and grade IV 5 cases. At most, the group of 45.6%.3.2 tinnitus group and non tinnitus control group were compared with the 10 acupoint pressure pain response and the pressure pain threshold (1) the 10 acupoint pressure pain response frequency comparison: 90 cases of tinnitus patients, the frequency of the pressure pain reaction was 76 times (84.4%), the non tinnitus control group was 20 times (66.7%), and the tinnitus group was significantly higher than the non tinnitus control group (P0.05 There was no significant difference between the other 9 points (ear, hearing, Yifeng, yoshu, Yangling spring, yangmausu spring, Qiu Xu, foot Lin weeping point) and non tinnitus control group (P0.05). (2) the mean of the 10 acupoint pressure pain threshold was compared with that of the tinnitus group, Yifeng, the wind pool and the 4 acupoints in the outer gate were less than the non tinnitus control group, and there were significant differences (P0.05); Zhong Zhu and Yang Mausoleum The mean value of the pressure pain threshold of the 3 acupoints in the 3 points was also less than that of the non tinnitus control group (P0.01); the other 3 points (ear, hearing, Qiu Xuxue) had no significant difference (P0.05), there were 30 cases of left tinnitus in the patients with.3.3 tinnitus (1) in 30 cases of left tinnitus, the ear door, hearing, Yifeng, the bone, the wind pool, the outer Guan, Zhong Zhu, and the ruins. There were significant difference (P0.01) in both sides of the 9 acupoints with pressure pain in the two sides of the foot and facing sobs, and there were significant difference (P0.01) in the right side. There were significant difference (P0.05) and significant difference (P0.01) in the right side reacting people at the right side of the Yang Ling spring acupoint, respectively. The 10 points were in the left and the right side had the pain response. All There was no significant difference (P0.05). (2) in 19 cases of right tinnitus, hearing, Yifeng, bone, wind pond, middle Zhu, Yang Ling spring, Qiu Xu, foot facing weeping 8 were higher than single in the left side, and there was a significant difference (P0.01) in the right side. There were significant differences (P0.05) and significant difference (P0.01); there was no significant difference in the left, right side, and bilateral pressure pain response (P0.05). There was no significant difference between the 10 points on the left and the right side with the pain response (P0.05). (3) in 39 cases of double tinnitus, the ears, hearing, Yifeng, the bone, the wind pool, the outer customs, and the Zhu Zhu There were significant difference (P0.01) in both sides of the 9 acupoints of Qiu Xu and foot facing weeping in both sides and on the right side, and there was a significant difference (P0.01) in the left side of the acupoint of Yang Ling Quan, which was higher than that in the right side (P0.01), but there was no significant difference between the two sides and the one on the left side. The difference (P0.05); in addition to the Yang mauling spring point, the other 9 points were in the left, and there was no significant difference in the right side. (P0.05).4 conclusion the 4.1 tinnitus group was compared with the non tinnitus control group. The most sensitive acupoint of the tenderness was the acupoint of the bone after the ear, followed by the Yifeng, the wind pool point, and the outside of the elbow and knee joints, the Zhu Zhu, the Yang Maling spring, the foot and the face. Weeping points suggest that these acupoints can be used as a priority selection for treatment of tinnitus 4.2 regardless of unilateral tinnitus or bilateral tinnitus. The frequency of the pressure is mostly bilateral higher than unilateral. It suggests that the clinical treatment of tinnitus can be selected as a bilateral acupoint.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：北京中醫(yī)藥大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：R246.81

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 田珊珊;冀美琦;劉岱;張偉;解秸萍;張亞力;李春華;高艷;;耳鳴患者督脈壓敏穴的分布及其聚類分析[J];環(huán)球中醫(yī)藥;2017年02期

2 冀美琦;田珊珊;劉岱;張偉;解秸萍;張亞力;李春華;高艷;;耳鳴患者壓敏穴分布規(guī)律的臨床研究[J];針刺研究;2016年06期

3 張海華;黃潤(rùn)澤;李知行;許能貴;唐凱婷;孫健;;基于數(shù)據(jù)挖掘針灸治療頸型頸椎病用穴規(guī)律探究[J];針灸臨床雜志;2016年09期

4 汪爽;王偉志;;獨(dú)取外關(guān)配合腰部運(yùn)動(dòng)治療急性腰扭傷38例[J];山東中醫(yī)藥大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2016年04期

5 徐彩霞;;常規(guī)取穴與安眠取穴針灸治療慢性原發(fā)性耳鳴療效觀察[J];新中醫(yī);2016年06期

6 付彩紅;李匡時(shí);鄒憶懷;;針刺陽陵泉對(duì)中風(fēng)偏癱患者感覺運(yùn)動(dòng)網(wǎng)絡(luò)影響的fMRI研究[J];天津中醫(yī)藥;2016年05期

7 宋晶;;針刺八脈交會(huì)穴治療圍絕經(jīng)期綜合征臨床觀察[J];上海針灸雜志;2016年04期

8 倪偉;;電針配合風(fēng)市穴穴位注射注射用燈盞花素治療神經(jīng)性耳鳴的臨床研究[J];河北中醫(yī);2016年02期

9 房雅楠;隋汝波;張磊;;針刺完骨穴對(duì)血管性癡呆大鼠海馬炎性細(xì)胞因子的影響[J];西安交通大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(醫(yī)學(xué)版);2016年04期

10 尹超群;;疏利少陽法治療抑郁癥50例臨床觀察[J];亞太傳統(tǒng)醫(yī)藥;2016年07期

，

本文編號(hào)：1936902