《中国康复理论与实践》

《中国康复理论与实践》

• 临床研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

不同针刺法分期治疗腰椎间盘突出症的临床效果①

孙钰1，江文文1，王鹍1，刘刚刚1，杨可1，储浩然2   

  1. 1.安徽省淮北市中医医院，安徽淮北市235000；2.安徽中医药大学第二附属医院，安徽合肥市230061。
  • 出版日期:2016-02-25 发布日期:2016-06-01

Effect of Acupunctures Variable with Stages on Lumbar Intervertebral Dise Protrusion

SUN Yu1, JIANG Wen-wen1, WANG Kun1, LIU Gang-gang1, YANG Ke1, CHU Hao-ran2#br#   

  1. 1. Huaibei Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Huaibei, Anhui 235000, China; 2. The Second Affiliated Hospital of Anhui University of Chinese Medicine, Hefei, Anhui 230061, China
  • Published:2016-02-25 Online:2016-06-01

PDF (PC)

摘要： 目的探讨不同针刺法分期治疗腰椎间盘突出症的效果。方法2014 年10 月~2015 年7 月，本院98 例腰椎间盘突出症患者按首诊时间顺序，采用随机数字表法随机分为对照组(n=49)和观察组(n=49)。对照组采用常规针刺治疗。观察组根据患者的临床表现和分期分型的不同，选取阿是穴和环跳穴，采用不同的针刺方法，即急性期采用改良扬刺法，缓解期采用齐刺针法，恢复期采用傍刺针法。两组治疗均1 次/d，连续7 d 为1 个疗程，疗程间休息2 d，共治疗3 个疗程。治疗前和治疗第1、第2、第3 疗程结束后分别对两组患者进行视觉模拟量表(VAS)和Oswestry 功能障碍指数(ODI)评分，并进行临床疗效评定。结果两组治疗后VAS评分、ODI 评分均较治疗前改善(F>7.12, P<0.05)，观察组优于对照组(t>4.43, P<0.05)。观察组临床疗效优于对照组(χ2=5.594,P<0.05)。结论不同针刺法分期治疗腰椎间盘突出症疗效优于常规针刺治疗。

关键词: 椎间盘突出症, 分期治疗, 针刺, 急性期, 缓解期, 恢复期

Abstract: Objective To investigate the effect of acupunctures variable with stages on lumbar intervertebral dise protrusion (LIDP). Methods 98 LIDP patients in our hospital from October, 2014 to July, 2015 were randomly divided into control group (n=49) and observation group (n=49) according to the sequence of first diagnosis time. The control group received routine acupuncture, and the observation group acupunctured at Ouch point and Huantiao point (GB30) with different acupuncture according to manifestations and courses. Modified Yang acupuncture was adopted in acute phase, triple acupuncture was used in remittent phase, and lateral needling was used in the recovery phase. They were both treated once a day, 7 days as a course for 3 courses with 2 days of interval. Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and clinical effects were assessed before and 1, 2, 3 courses after treatment. Results Both VAS and ODI scores improved after treatment (F>7.12, P<0.05), especially in the observation group (t>4.43, P<0.05). The efficiency was higher in the observation group than in the control group (χ2=5.594, P<0.05). Conclusion Compared with normal acupuncture, the acupunctures variable with stages is more effective on LIDP than routine.

Key words: lumbar intervertebral dise protrusion, staging treatment, acupuncture, acute phase, remittent phase, recovery phase