基于等长收缩最大肌力观察合谷刺法治疗第三腰椎横突综合征的临床研究

发布时间：2018-03-29 20:50

本文选题：合谷刺法　切入点：第三腰椎横突综合征　出处：《福建中医药大学》2016年硕士论文

【摘要】：目的：基于等长收缩最大肌力观察合谷刺法治疗第三腰椎横突综合征的临床疗效,为古法今用在临床治疗方面提供客观依据及新思路。方法：将60例符合要求的第三腰椎横突综合征患者随机分成治疗组和对照组,治疗组30例,对照组30例。治疗组予合谷刺法治疗,每日治疗1次,每次治疗时间为30分钟,7次为1个疗程,共治疗2个疗程；对照组予常规针刺法治疗,治疗的时间、周期同治疗组。两组患者在首次治疗前与末次治疗后都各做1次等长收缩最大肌力检测及VAS评分。治疗2个疗程后,通过组内自身前后对比及组间对比观察比较其临床疗效。结果：1.临床疗效：治疗组有效率为77.78%,治愈率为29.63%,对照组有效率为62.96%,治愈率为3.70%,两组有效率相比无统计学差异(P＞0.05),治愈率相比有统计学差异(P0.05)。2.腰部等长收缩最大肌力：(1)治疗前,两组患者前屈、背伸、左右侧屈、左右旋转各方向腰部等长收缩最大肌力相比无显著差异,具有可比性(P0.05)；(2)治疗2个疗程后,两组组内比较显示,两组患者腰部各方向等长收缩最大肌力与治疗前比较均显示有显著统计学差异(P0.01)；(3)治疗2个疗程后,两组组间比较显示,两组患者左旋转、右旋转方向腰部等长收缩最大肌力相比均有显著统计学差异(P0.01),而前屈、背伸、左侧屈、右侧屈方向腰部等长收缩最大肌力比较无统计学差异(P0.05)。3.VAS：(1)治疗前,两组患者VAS评分具有可比性(P0.05)；(2)治疗2个疗程后,两组患者治疗前后组内对比VAS均有显著下降(P0.01)；(3)治疗2个疗程后,两组患者VAS组间对比显示有显著统计学差异(P0.01)。结论：1.合谷刺法和常规针刺法治疗第三腰椎横突综合征均有疗效,但合谷刺法的治愈率优于常规针刺法。2.合谷刺法和常规针刺法治疗后对第三腰椎横突综合征患者腰部各方向等长收缩最大肌力均有改善作用,但合谷刺法改善左旋转、右旋转方向腰部等长收缩最大肌力优于常规针刺法。3.合谷刺法和常规针刺法治疗后均能减轻疼痛,但合谷刺法在减轻疼痛上优于常规针刺法。
[Abstract]:Objective: to observe the clinical effect of Hegu acupuncture on the third lumbar transverse process syndrome based on the maximum muscle strength of isometric contraction. Methods: 60 cases of the third lumbar transverse process syndrome were randomly divided into the treatment group and the control group, 30 cases in the treatment group, 30 cases in the treatment group, 30 cases in the treatment group, 30 cases in the treatment group, 30 cases in the treatment group, 30 cases in the treatment group, 30 cases in the treatment group. The control group (30 cases) was treated with Hegu needling method once a day for 30 minutes and 7 times as a course of treatment for 2 courses of treatment, while the control group was treated with routine acupuncture method for the time of treatment. In the same treatment group, the patients in the two groups were given 1 isometric maximum contraction muscle strength test and VAS score before and after the first treatment and after the last treatment. After two courses of treatment, Results: clinical efficacy: the effective rate of the treatment group was 77.78, the cure rate was 29.63. In the control group, the effective rate was 62.96 and the cure rate was 3.70. There was no statistical difference between the two groups. The difference was significant (P > 0.05), and the cure rate was significantly higher than that of the control group (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the maximum muscle strength of the lumbar isometric contraction in different directions of rotation and left, but there was no significant difference between the two groups after two courses of treatment (P 0.05). After two courses of treatment, the comparison between the two groups showed that the maximum muscle strength of the lumbar isometric contraction in the two groups was higher than that in the control group. The maximal muscle strength of isometric contraction in all directions of waist in both groups was significantly different from that before treatment (P 0.01) after 2 courses of treatment, the comparison between the two groups showed that the patients in the two groups rotated left. The maximum muscle strength of isometric contraction in the right rotation direction was significantly different from that in the waist, but there was no significant difference in the maximum muscle strength of the lumbar isometric contraction in the front flexion, back extension, left flexion and right flexion direction (P 0.05. 3. Vas: 1) before the treatment, there was no significant difference in the maximum muscle strength of the lumbar isometric contraction in the right rotation direction. The VAS scores of the two groups were comparable (P0.05 / 2). After two courses of treatment, the comparison of VAS between the two groups was significantly lower than that in the control group (P 0.01) after 2 courses of treatment, and there was no significant difference between the two groups before and after the treatment. There was a significant statistical difference between the two groups in VAS group. Conclusion: Hegu acupuncture and routine acupuncture are effective in the treatment of the third lumbar transverse process syndrome. However, the cure rate of Hegu needling method was better than that of conventional acupuncture method .2.Hegu needling method and conventional acupuncture method could improve the maximum muscle strength of isometric contraction in all directions of the waist of the patients with third lumbar transverse process syndrome, but Hegu needling method could improve left rotation. The maximum muscle force of isometric contraction in the right rotation direction is better than that of the conventional acupuncture method .3.Hegu needling and conventional acupuncture can both relieve the pain, but the Hegu acupuncture is superior to the conventional acupuncture in alleviating the pain.
【学位授予单位】：福建中医药大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：R246.9

【相似文献】