不同时间腰椎正骨治疗腰椎间盘突出症的疗效

目的探讨不同时间腰椎正骨治疗腰椎间盘突出症(LIDP)的临床疗效。方法选择符合入选标准的LIDP患者80例,分为对照组、急性期正骨组、亚急性期正骨组和恢复期正骨组,每组20例。对照组患者予以电针和中药热雾治疗,急性期正骨组、亚急性期正骨组和恢复期正骨组患者在对照组治疗的基础上,分别在LIDP急性期、亚急性期及恢复期给予正骨治疗,治疗结束后比较疗效。结果亚急性期正骨组患者治疗后LDIP评分和治疗有效率高于对照组、急性期正骨组和恢复期正骨组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);对照组、急性期正骨组和恢复期正骨组LDIP评分和治疗有效率比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论电针和中药热雾治疗LIDP疗效确切,中医正骨治疗LIDP的最佳时机是亚急性期。

Efficacy of the lumbar spine orthopedic treatment for lumbar intervertebral disc protrusion in different time

Objective To investigate the efficacy of the lumbar spine orthopedic treatment for lumbar intervertebral disc protrusion（LIDP） in different time.Methods Eighty patients with LIDP were selected and divided into control group,acute orthopedic group,sub-acute orthopedic group and recovery orthopedic group,with 20 patients in each group.The control group received acupuncture and herbal thermal spray treatment.Based on these,the patients in other groups who were in the acute phase,subacute phase and convalescent phase respectively received acupuncture,herbal heat haze and bonesetting.The efficacy was compared in the four groups.Results After treatment,LIDP score and treatment efficacy of sub-acute orthopedic group were higher than those of the other three groups and the difference was statistically significant（P〈 0.05）; In addition,there was no significant difference in the LIDP score and treatment efficacy among control group,acute orthopedic group and recovery orthopedic group（P〉 0.05）.Conclusion Electro-acupuncture and herbal thermal spray treatment for LIDP is effective and the best time of the lumbar spine orthopedic treatment for LIDP is the sub-acute phase.