本文選題：腰椎間盤(pán)突出癥　切入點(diǎn)：中醫(yī)療法　出處：《湖北中醫(yī)藥大學(xué)》2015年碩士論文

【摘要】：目的:了解輕中度腰椎間盤(pán)突出癥患者對(duì)單項(xiàng)中醫(yī)療法、中西醫(yī)結(jié)合療法、中醫(yī)綜合療法的可接受性情況。方法:選取我市作為調(diào)查點(diǎn),對(duì)2013年10月至2014年12月所有輕中度腰椎間盤(pán)突出癥門(mén)診患者共504名進(jìn)行調(diào)查,內(nèi)容包括一般人口學(xué)特征、患者對(duì)治療過(guò)程依從性、及治療方法安全性、有效性等方面的可接受性情況,治療前后sf-12量表等。利用Epidata3.02軟件進(jìn)行數(shù)據(jù)錄入后,用SPSS13.0進(jìn)行統(tǒng)計(jì)分析,分析方法包括卡方檢驗(yàn)、非參數(shù)檢驗(yàn)、方差分析等。結(jié)果:1、患者對(duì)單項(xiàng)中醫(yī)療法、中西醫(yī)結(jié)合療法、中醫(yī)綜合療法的可接受性情況存在統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異,具體表現(xiàn)為:(1)治療過(guò)程依從性良好率由高到低依次為:中醫(yī)綜合療法(99.0%)、中西醫(yī)結(jié)合(98.1%)、單項(xiàng)中醫(yī)技術(shù)(91.6%),三組間比較存在差異(P0.05);(2)治療有效率由高到低依次為:中西醫(yī)結(jié)合(100.0%)、中醫(yī)綜合療法(100.0%)、單項(xiàng)中醫(yī)技術(shù)(95.9%),三組間比較存在差異(P0.05);(3)治療過(guò)程滿(mǎn)意率由高到低依次為:中醫(yī)綜合療法(100.0%)、單項(xiàng)中醫(yī)技術(shù)(98.6%)、中西醫(yī)結(jié)合(96.3%),三組間比較存在差異(P0.05);(4)治療后療效滿(mǎn)意率由高到低依次為:中醫(yī)綜合療法(100.0%)、中西醫(yī)結(jié)合(98.1%)、單項(xiàng)中醫(yī)技術(shù)(95.8%),三組間比較存在差異(P0.05);(5)治療后費(fèi)用滿(mǎn)意率由高到低依次為:中醫(yī)綜合療法(100.0%)、單項(xiàng)中醫(yī)技術(shù)(98.7%)、中西醫(yī)結(jié)合(98.1%),三組間比較存在差異(P0.05)。2、患者治療前后SF-12量表軀體部分得分差值由高到低依次為:中醫(yī)綜合療法(17.3±6.5)、中西醫(yī)結(jié)合療法(14.9±4.8)、單項(xiàng)中醫(yī)療法(11.7±4.3),組內(nèi)兩兩比較有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P0.001);患者治療前后精神部分得分差值由高到低依此為:中醫(yī)綜合療法(20.1±5.6)、中西醫(yī)結(jié)合療法(18.1±4.2)、單項(xiàng)中醫(yī)療法(15.7±3.9),組內(nèi)兩兩比較有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P0.001)。結(jié)論:中醫(yī)綜合療法治療腰椎間盤(pán)突出癥療效好,副反應(yīng)、風(fēng)險(xiǎn)小,治療費(fèi)用適中,患者易于接受。
[Abstract]:Objective: to investigate the acceptability of the patients with mild and moderate lumbar intervertebral disc herniation to single Chinese medicine therapy, integrated traditional Chinese and western medicine therapy and comprehensive traditional Chinese medicine therapy. A total of 504 outpatients with mild and moderate lumbar disc herniation from October 2013 to December 2014 were investigated, including general demographic characteristics, patients' compliance with the treatment process, and the safety of treatment methods. The acceptability of validity, sf-12 scale before and after treatment, and so on. After the data was recorded in Epidata3.02 software, the statistical analysis was carried out with SPSS13.0. The analytical methods included chi-square test, non-parametric test, etc. Analysis of variance and so on. Results: 1. There is a statistical difference in the acceptability of individual Chinese medicine therapy, integrated traditional Chinese and western medicine therapy, and combination therapy of traditional Chinese medicine. The order of compliance in the treatment process from high to low is as follows: comprehensive therapy of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) is 99.0, integrated traditional Chinese and western medicine (TCM) is 98.1U, single TCM technique is 91.6, and there are differences among the three groups (P < 0.05)) the effective rate of treatment is from high to low: Chinese and Western medicine. The satisfaction rate of the treatment process is from high to low. The order of satisfaction rate between the three groups is as follows: comprehensive therapy of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) 100.0, single Chinese medicine technique (98.6C), integrated Chinese and western medicine (96.33B), and the three groups have a poor treatment process satisfaction rate (P < 0.05). The order of satisfaction in the treatment process is as follows: TCM comprehensive therapy, single TCM technique, integrated Chinese and western medicine, 96.33n, and the differences among the three groups are as follows: the rate of satisfaction in the treatment process is 100.00. After the treatment, the satisfactory rate of curative effect is in the order of high to low: comprehensive therapy of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) is 100.00, integrated Chinese and western medicine is 98.1, single Chinese medicine technique is 95.8%, there is difference among the three groups (P 0.05) the satisfaction rate of cost after treatment is from high to low: the rate of satisfaction of cost after treatment is: comprehensive therapy of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM). There were significant differences between the three groups (P 0.05). Before and after treatment, the difference of body part score of SF-12 scale in patients was 17.3 鹵6.5%, 14.9 鹵4.8 and 14.9 鹵4.8in the order of TCM comprehensive therapy, TCM combined therapy and traditional Chinese medicine therapy respectively, and the difference between the three groups before and after treatment was significant (P0.05. 2, P < 0. 05, P < 0. 05, P < 0. 05), respectively, and the difference between the three groups was significant (P < 0. 05). The scores of mental part of the patients before and after treatment were from high to low. According to this, the scores of the mental part of the patients were 20.1 鹵5.6, 18.1 鹵4.2g, 15.7 鹵3.9g, respectively. There was statistical difference between the two groups. Conclusion: the treatment of lumbar intervertebral disc herniation with traditional Chinese medicine is effective. Side effects, low risk, moderate cost of treatment, patients are easy to accept.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湖北中醫(yī)藥大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：R681.53

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 呂志剛;張曦;謝國(guó)華;;腰椎間盤(pán)突出癥的治療進(jìn)展[J];中國(guó)中醫(yī)骨傷科雜志;2008年12期

2 佘瑞平;;強(qiáng)脊四穴深刺治療腰椎間盤(pán)突出癥療效觀察[J];中國(guó)針灸;2008年05期

3 朱崇安;;綜合療法治療腰椎間盤(pán)突出癥的臨床觀察[J];內(nèi)蒙古中醫(yī)藥;2008年09期

4 林勛;元唯安;何天翔;;推拿治療腰椎間盤(pán)突出癥臨床觀察[J];遼寧中醫(yī)藥大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2008年05期

5 郭永紅;;分期推拿治療腰椎間盤(pán)突出癥[J];按摩與導(dǎo)引;2008年04期

6 商強(qiáng)強(qiáng);;腰椎間盤(pán)突出癥的研究進(jìn)展[J];中國(guó)實(shí)用醫(yī)藥;2008年05期

7 趙育乾;劉通;;骶管注射中藥制劑治療腰椎間盤(pán)突出癥進(jìn)展[J];頸腰痛雜志;2007年06期

8 李書(shū)耀;;綜合療法治療腰椎間盤(pán)突出癥[J];中醫(yī)正骨;2007年09期

9 徐寧達(dá);陳浩雄;譚煦;彭力平;;綜合療法治療腰椎間盤(pán)突出癥41例療效觀察[J];廣州中醫(yī)藥大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2007年05期

10 劉有繩;;推拿治療腰椎間盤(pán)突出癥720例[J];按摩與導(dǎo)引;2007年08期

，

本文編號(hào)：1665857