论文部分内容阅读
目的:观察热敏灸疗法与针刺疗法治疗爱尔兰人椎间盘源性腰痛(寒湿痹证型)的疗效差异.方法:将82例病人随机分成热敏灸组(43例)和针刺组(39例),热敏灸组在腰骶部相应部位寻找热敏点,然后在热敏点施灸,使灸感传导,到灸感传导结束后治疗结束,如果不出现灸感,就在相应痛点施灸30 min;针刺组取相应的华佗夹脊、背俞穴及委中进行针刺,配穴为环跳、风市、阳陵泉、秩边等,针刺后在腰部加神灯照射,留针30 min.每周治疗2次,4周为一疗程,治疗8周后统计疗效.结果:热敏灸组,临床治愈19例,好转20例,无效4例,有效率90.7%(39/43).针刺组,临床治愈9例,好转25例,无效5例,有效率87.2%(34/39).两组间临床治愈例数比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),热敏灸组优于针刺组.结论:热敏灸疗法治疗爱尔兰人椎间盘源性腰痛疗效优于传统针刺疗法.“,”Objective To observe the therapeutic difference in treatment of Irishmen with discogeniclow back pain (arthritis of cold-damp syndrome type) between heat-sensitive acupoint and acupuncture.Methods Eighty-two patients were randomly assigned to the heat-sensitive group (43 cases) andthe acupuncture group (39 cases). Corresponding heat-sensitive points in the lumbosacral area wereselected in the heat-sensitive group. Then moxibustion was performed at the heat-sensitive acupoint,thus conducting the moxibustion sensation. The treatment was ended when the sensation conductionwas finished. If there appeared no moxibustion sensation, moxibustion at the corresponding painfulirradiated with TDP after needling, with the maintaining time of 30 min. The treatment was carried outtwice weekly, four weeks as one therapeutic course. The therapeutic effect was statistically calculatedafter 8-week treatment. Results Nineteen cases were clinically cured, 20 improved, 4 failed, and theeffective rate 90.7%(39/43) in the heat-sensitive group, while 9 clinically cured, 25 improved, 5 failed,and the effective rate 87.2%(34/39) in the acupuncture group. Significant difference was shown in theclinically cured case by x2 test (P<0.05). Conclusion Heat-sensitive acupoint was superior to traditionalacupuncture in treatment Irishmen with discogenic low back pain.