穴位埋線治療足太陽經(jīng)型腰椎間盤突出癥的臨床研究
發(fā)布時間：2018-09-06 18:23
【摘要】：目的觀察穴位埋線和常規(guī)針刺療法治療足太陽經(jīng)型腰椎間盤突出癥的臨床療效,客觀地評價這兩種治療方法的療效差異;觀察穴位埋線治療足太陽經(jīng)型腰椎間盤突出癥的近期及遠期臨床療效并進行客觀地評價。方法將符合納入標準的60例患者采用隨機數(shù)字表法隨機分為觀察組(穴位埋線組)和對照組(常規(guī)針刺組),每組各30例。觀察組運用穴位埋線治療,取兩組穴位交替治療,每周埋線1次,2周為1個療程,治療2個療程;對照組采用常規(guī)針刺治療,每周針刺3次,2周為1個療程,治療2個療程。治療結(jié)束后,通過比較兩組患者的疼痛視覺模擬評分(VAS)、日本骨科學會(JOA)的各項評分、JOA的綜合評分,分別評價兩種療法在治療結(jié)束后(近期)及治療結(jié)束1月(遠期)的療效差異,并對相關(guān)數(shù)據(jù)進行統(tǒng)計學分析。結(jié)果(1)治療前兩組一般資料和各項指標基線比較,差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05)組間具有可比性。(2)JOA的各項評分比較:(1)組內(nèi)比較:治療前與治療結(jié)束后兩組組內(nèi)比較,差異均有統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05);治療前與治療結(jié)束1月兩組組內(nèi)比較:觀察組的差異有統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05),對照組的差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05);治療結(jié)束后與治療結(jié)束1月兩組組內(nèi)比較:觀察組的差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05),對照組的差異有統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05)。(2)組間比較:治療結(jié)束后兩組組間比較,觀察組腰痛、下肢痛及麻木、行走、日�；顒拥脑u分均高于對照組,差異具有統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05);治療結(jié)束后兩組組間比較,兩組的直腿抬高試驗、感覺、肌力方面的評分的差異均無統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05);治療結(jié)束1月兩組組間比較,兩組的腰痛、下肢痛及麻木、行走、日�；顒印⒅蓖忍Ц咴囼�、感覺、肌力的評分的差異均有統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05)。(3)JOA的綜合評分比較:(1)組內(nèi)比較:治療前與治療結(jié)束后兩組組內(nèi)比較,差異均有統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05);治療前與治療結(jié)束1月兩組組內(nèi)比較,觀察組的差異有統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05),對照組的差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05);治療結(jié)束后與治療結(jié)束1月兩組組內(nèi)比較,觀察組的差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05),對照組的差異有統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05)。(2)組間比較:治療結(jié)束后、治療結(jié)束1月兩組組間比較,差異均有統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05)。(4)VAS評分比較:(1)組內(nèi)比較:治療前與治療結(jié)束后兩組組內(nèi)比較,兩組的差異均有統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05);治療前與治療結(jié)束1月兩組組內(nèi)比較,觀察組的差異有統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05),對照組的差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05);治療結(jié)束后與治療結(jié)束1月兩組組內(nèi)比較,觀察組的差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05),對照組的差異有統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05)。(2)組間比較:治療結(jié)束后兩組組間比較,差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05);治療結(jié)束1月兩組組間比較,差異有統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05)。(5)綜合療效比較:治療結(jié)束后及治療結(jié)束1月兩組的綜合療效比較,均是P0.05,有顯著統(tǒng)計學差異。結(jié)論本課題的研究結(jié)果表明穴位埋線和常規(guī)針刺在近期改善腰椎間盤突出癥患者的直腿抬高試驗、感覺、肌力方面無差異,但穴位埋線在近期改善患者的腰痛、下肢痛及麻木、行走、日常活動方面明顯優(yōu)于常規(guī)針刺;穴位埋線和常規(guī)針刺均能有效治療足太陽經(jīng)型腰椎間盤突出癥,都能改善患者的綜合癥狀、體征及日常活動,但穴位埋線臨床療效的穩(wěn)定性明顯高于常規(guī)針刺,即穴位埋線在遠期不易復(fù)發(fā),而常規(guī)針刺易復(fù)發(fā);穴位埋線和常規(guī)針刺在近期治療腰椎間盤突出癥引起的綜合疼痛方面無差異,但穴位埋線在遠期改善患者的綜合疼痛方面明顯優(yōu)于常規(guī)針刺;穴位埋線治療腰椎間盤突出癥近期及遠期的綜合療效明顯均優(yōu)于常規(guī)針刺。
[Abstract]:Objective To observe the clinical effect of Catgut Embedding at acupoints and conventional acupuncture on lumbar intervertebral disc herniation of foot-solar meridian type, objectively evaluate the difference between the two methods, observe the short-term and long-term clinical effect of Catgut Embedding at acupoints on lumbar intervertebral disc herniation of foot-solar meridian type and objectively evaluate it. 60 patients were randomly divided into observation group (acupoint catgut embedding group) and control group (routine acupuncture group) with 30 cases in each group. After the treatment, the visual analogue pain score (VAS), the Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scores and the JOA comprehensive score were compared to evaluate the efficacy of the two treatments at the end of treatment (short-term) and 1 month (long-term) respectively, and the relevant data were statistically analyzed. Before treatment, there was no significant difference between the two groups in general data and baseline comparison of various indicators (P There was statistical significance (P 0.05), the difference between the control group was not statistically significant (P 0.05); after treatment and one month after treatment, there was no significant difference between the two groups: observation group difference (P 0.05), the difference between the control group was statistically significant (P 0.05). (2) Comparison between the two groups: after treatment, the observation group of low back pain, lower limb pain and numbness, line The scores of walking and daily activities of the two groups were higher than those of the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (P 0.05). Straight leg elevation test, sensation, muscle strength scores were statistically significant (P 0.05). (3) JOA comprehensive score comparison: (1) before treatment and after treatment in the two groups, the difference was statistically significant (P 0.05); before treatment and 1 month after treatment in the two groups, the observation group differences were statistically significant (P 0.05). There was no significant difference between the control group (P 0.05); there was no significant difference between the two groups after treatment and one month after treatment (P 0.05), and there was significant difference between the two groups (P 0.05). (2) Comparison between the two groups: after treatment, one month after treatment, the difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P 0.05). (4) VAS score ratio. Comparison: (1) Intra-group comparison: Before treatment and after treatment, there were statistically significant differences between the two groups (P 0.05); before treatment and after treatment for 1 month, the difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P 0.05), the difference between the control group was not statistically significant (P 0.05); after treatment and after treatment for 1 month, the difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P 0.05). There was no significant difference between the observation group and the control group (P 0.05). (2) Comparison between the two groups after treatment, there was no significant difference between the two groups (P 0.05); After treatment for 1 month, there was a significant difference between the two groups (P 0.05). (5) Comprehensive efficacy comparison: after treatment and treatment for 1 month after the end of the two groups. Conclusion There is no difference between acupoint catgut embedding and conventional acupuncture in improving straight leg elevation test, sensation and muscle strength of patients with lumbar intervertebral disc herniation in the near future, but acupoint catgut embedding can improve low back pain, lower limb pain and numbness, walking and daily activities of patients in the near future. Both acupoint catgut embedding and routine acupuncture can effectively treat lumbar intervertebral disc herniation of foot-solar meridian type, and can improve the comprehensive symptoms, signs and daily activities of patients, but the stability of clinical efficacy of acupoint catgut embedding is significantly higher than that of routine acupuncture, that is, Catgut Embedding at acupoint is not easy to recur in the long term, while routine acupuncture is easy to recur. There was no difference between catgut embedding and routine acupuncture in the treatment of comprehensive pain caused by lumbar disc herniation in the near future, but Catgut Embedding at acupoints was superior to routine acupuncture in the long term.
【學位授予單位】：云南中醫(yī)學院
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：R246.9
[Abstract]:Objective To observe the clinical effect of Catgut Embedding at acupoints and conventional acupuncture on lumbar intervertebral disc herniation of foot-solar meridian type, objectively evaluate the difference between the two methods, observe the short-term and long-term clinical effect of Catgut Embedding at acupoints on lumbar intervertebral disc herniation of foot-solar meridian type and objectively evaluate it. 60 patients were randomly divided into observation group (acupoint catgut embedding group) and control group (routine acupuncture group) with 30 cases in each group. After the treatment, the visual analogue pain score (VAS), the Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scores and the JOA comprehensive score were compared to evaluate the efficacy of the two treatments at the end of treatment (short-term) and 1 month (long-term) respectively, and the relevant data were statistically analyzed. Before treatment, there was no significant difference between the two groups in general data and baseline comparison of various indicators (P There was statistical significance (P 0.05), the difference between the control group was not statistically significant (P 0.05); after treatment and one month after treatment, there was no significant difference between the two groups: observation group difference (P 0.05), the difference between the control group was statistically significant (P 0.05). (2) Comparison between the two groups: after treatment, the observation group of low back pain, lower limb pain and numbness, line The scores of walking and daily activities of the two groups were higher than those of the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (P 0.05). Straight leg elevation test, sensation, muscle strength scores were statistically significant (P 0.05). (3) JOA comprehensive score comparison: (1) before treatment and after treatment in the two groups, the difference was statistically significant (P 0.05); before treatment and 1 month after treatment in the two groups, the observation group differences were statistically significant (P 0.05). There was no significant difference between the control group (P 0.05); there was no significant difference between the two groups after treatment and one month after treatment (P 0.05), and there was significant difference between the two groups (P 0.05). (2) Comparison between the two groups: after treatment, one month after treatment, the difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P 0.05). (4) VAS score ratio. Comparison: (1) Intra-group comparison: Before treatment and after treatment, there were statistically significant differences between the two groups (P 0.05); before treatment and after treatment for 1 month, the difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P 0.05), the difference between the control group was not statistically significant (P 0.05); after treatment and after treatment for 1 month, the difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P 0.05). There was no significant difference between the observation group and the control group (P 0.05). (2) Comparison between the two groups after treatment, there was no significant difference between the two groups (P 0.05); After treatment for 1 month, there was a significant difference between the two groups (P 0.05). (5) Comprehensive efficacy comparison: after treatment and treatment for 1 month after the end of the two groups. Conclusion There is no difference between acupoint catgut embedding and conventional acupuncture in improving straight leg elevation test, sensation and muscle strength of patients with lumbar intervertebral disc herniation in the near future, but acupoint catgut embedding can improve low back pain, lower limb pain and numbness, walking and daily activities of patients in the near future. Both acupoint catgut embedding and routine acupuncture can effectively treat lumbar intervertebral disc herniation of foot-solar meridian type, and can improve the comprehensive symptoms, signs and daily activities of patients, but the stability of clinical efficacy of acupoint catgut embedding is significantly higher than that of routine acupuncture, that is, Catgut Embedding at acupoint is not easy to recur in the long term, while routine acupuncture is easy to recur. There was no difference between catgut embedding and routine acupuncture in the treatment of comprehensive pain caused by lumbar disc herniation in the near future, but Catgut Embedding at acupoints was superior to routine acupuncture in the long term.
【學位授予單位】：云南中醫(yī)學院
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：R246.9
【相似文獻】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條
1 鄒本桂;穴位埋線治療痤瘡86例[J];中國鄉(xiāng)村醫(yī)生;2000年12期
2 馬向明;穴位埋線治療遺精36例[J];針灸臨床雜志;2000年06期
3 吳緒平,張道敬;穴位埋線治療癲癇54例[J];中國民間療法;2000年04期
4 王增;穴位埋線治療便秘[J];中國針灸;2002年08期
5 肖波;穴位埋線治療胃及十二指腸潰瘍218例[J];上海針灸雜志;2002年02期
6 龍煌;穴位埋線治療癲癇1例[J];上海針灸雜志;2003年04期
7 孟軍紅;穴位埋線治療矮身材98例[J];中國中醫(yī)藥科技;2003年05期
8 王素玲;;穴位埋線治療肥胖100例觀察[J];實用中醫(yī)內(nèi)科雜志;2006年01期
9 宋永紅;;穴位埋線治療癲癇2例[J];上海針灸雜志;2006年02期
10 張靜;莊禮興;;穴位埋線治療癲癇[J];針灸臨床雜志;2006年02期
相關(guān)會議論文 前10條
1 王光安;;推拿結(jié)合穴位埋線治療2型糖尿病28例[A];2011中國針灸學會年會論文集（摘要）[C];2011年
2 朱在卿;;穴位埋線治療偏頭痛療效觀察[A];山東省2013年神經(jīng)內(nèi)科學學術(shù)會議暨中國神經(jīng)免疫大會2013論文匯編[C];2013年
3 楊佩蘭;湯杰;沈毅韻;李t，
本文編號：2227151
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/zhongyixuelunwen/2227151.html
最近更新
教材專著
