平衡针膝痛穴配合常规针刺治疗膝关节骨性关节炎的临床观察

发布时间：2018-10-22 19:06

【摘要】：目的:比较平衡针膝痛穴配合常规针刺与常规针刺治疗膝关节骨性关节炎的临床疗效差异。方法:将60例患者随机分为平衡针组(治疗组)和常规针刺组(对照组),每组30例。治疗组取平衡针膝痛穴,配合常规针刺治疗,选取局部腧穴内外膝眼、血海、梁丘、阳陵泉、阴陵泉。膝痛穴予0.3mm×40mm毫针快速进针35mm后,行提插手法,使酸麻胀感向腕关节背侧或食指、拇指间传导,再予顺时针捻转滞针以加强针感,针感以患者耐受为度,留针30分钟。局部腧穴予快速进针法进针,得气后,行平补平泻手法,留针30分钟。对照组给予常规针刺治疗,局部选穴及针刺方法同治疗组。两组患者均每天治疗1次,每周治疗5次,休息2天,共治疗4周。首次治疗后比较两组患者疼痛视觉模拟法(VAS)评分的变化,治疗4周后及治疗结束后1个月随访比较两组患者疼痛视觉模拟法(VAS)评分和西安大略和麦克马斯特国际骨关节炎指数量表(WOMAC)评分的变化,并比较两组疗效。结果:首次治疗后,平衡针组VAS评分明显降低,优于常规针刺组(P0.01)。治疗4周后,两组患者VAS评分和WOMAC量表评分均降低,但平衡针组明显优于常规针刺组(P0.01)。治疗结束后1个月随访,平衡针组VAS评分和WOMAC量表评分均较治疗4周后降低(P0.01),而常规针刺组VAS评分和WOMAC评分均较治疗4周后增高(P0.05)。平衡针组愈显率为83.3%,高于常规针刺组的56.7%(P0.05);平衡针组总有效率为96.7%,高于常规针刺组的76.7%(P0.05)。两组结果对比差异显著,有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:平衡针膝痛穴配合常规针刺治疗膝关节骨性关节炎疗效确切,优于常规针刺治疗,且具有良好的首次即时止痛效应及远期疗效。
[Abstract]:Objective: to compare the clinical curative effect of balanced acupuncture on knee pain and routine acupuncture on knee osteoarthritis. Methods: 60 patients were randomly divided into balanced acupuncture group (treatment group) and routine acupuncture group (control group) with 30 cases in each group. In the treatment group, the balanced acupuncture points of knee pain, combined with routine acupuncture treatment, selected local acupoints inside and outside the knee eye, blood sea, Liang Qiu, Yanglingquan, Yin Lingquan. After the 0.3mm 脳 40mm needle was put into the needle 35mm quickly, the acid-swelling sensation was transferred to the dorsal side of the wrist or to the forefinger and the thumb, and then the needle was twirled clockwise to strengthen the acupuncture feeling. The acupuncture sensation was tolerant to the patient and kept the needle for 30 minutes. Local acupoints into the rapid acupuncture method into the needle, after Qi, flat-tonifying and reducing manipulation, keep the needle for 30 minutes. The control group was treated with routine acupuncture, the local acupoints selection and acupuncture were the same as the treatment group. The patients in both groups were treated once a day, 5 times a week, rest 2 days, and treated for 4 weeks. After the first treatment, the changes of (VAS) score of pain visual analogue method were compared between the two groups. After 4 weeks of treatment and 1 month after treatment, the changes of (VAS) score of visual analogue pain and (WOMAC) score of international osteoarthritis index scale in Western Ontario and McMaster were compared between the two groups, and the efficacy of the two groups was compared. Results: after the first treatment, the VAS score of the balanced acupuncture group was significantly lower than that of the routine acupuncture group (P0.01). After 4 weeks of treatment, the VAS score and WOMAC score of the two groups decreased, but the balance acupuncture group was significantly better than the routine acupuncture group (P0.01). After 1 month follow-up, the VAS score and WOMAC scale score in balanced acupuncture group were lower than those after 4 weeks treatment (P0.01), while the VAS score and WOMAC score in routine acupuncture group were higher than those after 4 weeks treatment (P0.05). The effective rate of the balanced acupuncture group was 83.3%, which was higher than that of the routine acupuncture group (56.7%), and the total effective rate of the balanced acupuncture group was 96.7%, which was higher than that of the routine acupuncture group (76.7%) (P0.05). There was significant difference between the two groups (P0.05). Conclusion: the treatment of knee joint osteoarthritis with balanced acupuncture and routine acupuncture is more effective than that of routine acupuncture, and has good first immediate analgesic effect and long term effect.
【学位授予单位】：广西中医药大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：R246.9

【参考文献】