| 曾婷婷.背部膀胱经挑刺治疗血瘀气滞型腰椎间盘突出症临床研究[J].浙江中西医结合杂志,2020,30(8): |
| 背部膀胱经挑刺治疗血瘀气滞型腰椎间盘突出症临床研究 |
| Clinical study on the treatment of lumbar intervertebral disc herniation with blood stasis and qi stagnation by pricking the back bladder |
| 投稿时间：2019-12-04 修订日期：2020-03-09 |
| DOI： |
| 中文关键词: 针刺 膀胱经穴位 血瘀气滞型 腰椎间盘突出症 |
| 英文关键词:Acupuncture Bladder meridian acupoints Blood stasis and Qi stagnation Lumbar intervertebral disc herniation |
| 基金项目:2018年第二批义乌市科研计划项目（编号18-3-91） |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 589 |
| 全文下载次数: 19 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 目的 探讨背部膀胱经挑刺治疗血瘀气滞型腰椎间盘突出症临床疗效。方法 选取我院2018年2月至2019年6月收治的90例血瘀气滞型腰椎间盘突出症患者进行研究，根据随机数字表法由1:1:1分为三组（每组30例）。背部膀胱经挑刺组患者采用背部膀胱经挑刺治疗，传统针刺组患者取传统穴位针刺治疗，口服西药组患者采用塞来昔布治疗。对三组患者治疗前、治疗后1、3个月的疼痛视觉模拟评分（VAS）和腰椎疾患综合评分（JOA）、中医证候评分和临床疗效、不良反应情况进行对比分析。结果 背部膀胱经挑刺组总有效率（93.33%）高于传统针刺组（73.33%）、口服西药组（66.67%），差异具有统计学意义（χ2=6.686，P=0.035）。治疗前，背部膀胱经挑刺组、传统针刺组和口服西药组VAS评分比较无明显差异（P>0.05）；治疗后，背部膀胱经挑刺组、传统针刺组和口服西药组VAS评分明显降低，且背部膀胱经挑刺组治疗1个月、3个月后VAS评分低于传统针刺组、口服西药组（P<0.05）。治疗前，三组JOA评分比较无明显差异（P>0.05）；治疗后，背部膀胱经挑刺组、传统针刺组和口服西药组JOA评分均明显升高，且背部膀胱经挑刺组治疗1个月、3个月后JOA评分高于传统针刺组、口服西药组（P<0.05）。三组治疗前中医证候评分（腰痛如刺、下肢掣痛、不能转侧）比较无明显差异（P>0.05）；治疗后，三组的中医证候评分较治疗前均降低，且背部膀胱经挑刺组治疗1个月、3个月后中医证候评分低于传统针刺组、口服西药组（P<0.05）。背部膀胱经挑刺组、传统针刺组和口服西药组的不良反应发生率分别为10.00%、6.67%和6.67%，三组比较差异无统计学意义（χ2=0.310，P=0.856）。结论 背部膀胱经挑刺治疗血瘀气滞型腰椎间盘突出症患者的疗效较好，能有效缓解其疼痛及总体症状体征，改善腰椎功能，安全性较高。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| Objective: To investigate the clinical efficacy of the treatment of lumbar intervertebral disc herniation with blood stasis and qi stagnation by pricking the back bladder. Methods: Ninety patients with lumbar intervertebral disc herniation of blood stasis and qi stagnation type admitted to our hospital from February 2018 to June 2019 were selected for the study. According to the random number table method, they were divided into three groups (30 cases in each group). The patients in the back bladder meridian pricking group were treated with the back bladder meridian pricking, the patients in the traditional acupuncture group were treated with the traditional acupoint acupuncture, and the patients in the oral western medicine group were treated with celecoxib. The pain visual analogue score (VAS) and lumbar vertebral disease comprehensive score (JOA), TCM syndrome score, clinical efficacy and adverse reactions of the three groups were compared and analyzed before and after treatment for 1 and 3 months. Results: The total effective rate of the back bladder transvesical pricking group (93.33%) was higher than that of the traditional acupuncture group (73.33%) and the oral western medicine group (66.67%), and the difference was statistically significant (χ2=6.686, P=0.035). There was no significant difference in VAS score among the three groups before treatment (P>0.05); after treatment, the VAS score of the three groups was lower than that before treatment (P<0.05), and the VAS score of the back bladder meridian pricking group at the 1st month and 3rd months after treatment was lower than that of the traditional acupuncture group and the oral western medicine group(P<0.05). There was no significant difference in JOA score among the three groups before treatment (P>0.05); after treatment, the JOA score was significantly higher than that before treatment in three groups, and the JOA score of back bladder pricking group at the 1st month and 3rd months after treatment was higher than that of traditional acupuncture group and oral western medicine group (P<0.05). The scores of main symptoms of TCM (such as low back pain, lower back pain in limb palsy and non-turning side, etc.) before treatment in three groups was no significant difference (P>0.05). After treatment, the scores of main symptoms of TCM in three groups were lower than those before treatment, and the JOA scores in back bladder pricking group were lower than those in traditional acupuncture group and oral western medicine group at the 1st month and 3rd months after treatment (P<0.05). The incidence of adverse reactions in in back bladder pricking group, traditional acupuncture group and oral western medicine group were 10.00%, 6.67% and 6.67%, respectively, and there was no significant difference among the three groups (χ2=0.310, P=0.856). Conclusion: The treatment of lumbar disc herniation with blood stasis and qi stagnation by pricking the back bladder is effective, which can effectively alleviate pain and overall symptoms and signs, improve lumbar function, and has high safety. |
| 查看全文 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
|
|
|
