摘要
目的比较古法针刺、夹脊电针及口服颈舒颗粒治疗神经根型颈椎病(CSR)的疗效差异,探讨最有效的治疗方法。方法将160例CSR患者随机分成古法针刺组60例、夹脊电针组60例和颈舒颗粒组40例。古法针刺组采用古法针刺操作手法治疗,取腕骨、昆仑、外关、曲池、肩井、风池;夹脊电针组采用电针C4-7夹脊穴治疗;颈舒颗粒组采用口服颈舒颗粒治疗。治疗2个疗程后,采用国际公认的描述与测量疼痛的简化MPQ(SF-MPQ)量表评定疼痛改善情况。结果 3组治疗后各项PRI评分(PRI感觉分、PRI情绪分及PRI总分)与同组治疗前比较,差异均具有统计学意义(P<0.01,P<0.05)。古法针刺组治疗后各项PRI评分与夹脊电针组和颈舒颗粒组比较,差异均具有统计学意义(P<0.01,P<0.05)。夹脊电针组治疗后PRI感觉分与颈舒颗粒组比较,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。3组治疗后VAS评分、疼痛强度(PPI)评分及总积分与同组治疗前比较,差异均具有统计学意义(P<0.01)。古法针刺组治疗后VAS评分、PPI评分及总积分与夹脊电针组和颈舒颗粒组比较,差异均具有统计学意义(P<0.01,P<0.05)。夹脊电针组治疗后VAS评分、PPI评分及总积分与颈舒颗粒组比较,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论古法针刺是一种治疗神经根型颈椎病的有效方法,能迅速缓解疼痛。
Objective To compare the therapeutic efficacies of ancient needling method, electroacupuncture at Jiaji （EX-B 2）, and oral administration of.ling Shu granules in treating cervical spondylotic radiculopathy （CSR）, for seeking the most effective treatment method. Method Totally 160 CSR patients were randomized into an ancient needling group （60 cases）, an electroacupuncture group （60 cases）, and a Jing Shu granules group （40 cases）. The ancient needling group was intervened by ancient needling method by selecting Wangu （SI 4）, Kunlun （BL 60）, Waiguan （TE 5）, Quchi （LI 11）, Jianjing （GB 21）, and Fengchi （GB 20）; the electroacupuncture group was by electroacupuncture at Jiaji （EX-B 2） （C4-7）; the Jing Shu granules group was by oral administration ofJing Shu granules. After 2 treatment courses, the internationally recognized short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire （SF-MPQ） was used to evaluate the improvement of pain. Result After treatment, the pain rating indexes （PRI） scores （including sensory PRI, affective PRI, and total PRI） were changed significantly in the three groups （P〈0.01,P〈0.05）. The ancient needling group was significantly different from the other two groups in comparing the PRI scores （P〈0.01,P〈0.05）. The electroacupuncture group was significantly different from the .ring Shu granules group in comparing the sensory PRI score （P〈0.05）. After treatment, the Visual Analogue Scale （VAS） score, present pain intensity （PPI） and total score were changed significantly in all three groups （P 〈0.01）. The ancient needling group was significantly different from the other two groups in comparing the VAS score, PPI, and total score （P 〈 0.01,P 〈 0.05）. There were significant differences in comparing VAS score, PPI, and total score between the electroacupuncture group and .ling Shu granules group （P〈0.05）. Conclusion Ancient needling method is an effective method in treating CSR, by rapidly relieving pain.
出处
《上海针灸杂志》
2014年第5期445-447,共3页
Shanghai Journal of Acupuncture and Moxibustion
关键词
针刺疗法
电针
颈椎病
神经根型
麦吉尔疼痛问卷(MPQ)
Acupuncture therapy
Electroacupuncture
Cervical spondylosis, Nerve root type
McGill Pain Questionnaire （MPQ）
