龙虎交战针法治疗非特异性下背痛疗效观察

目的:比较龙虎交战针法与平补平泻针法、中频理疗治疗非特异性下背痛的临床疗效差异。方法:将90例非特异性下背痛患者随机分为龙虎交战针法组、平补平泻针法组和中频理疗组,各30例。龙虎交战针法组施以龙虎交战针法,平补平泻针法组采用平补平泻针法,均穴取①肾俞、大肠俞、委中、阿是穴,②气海俞、关元俞、昆仑、腰阳关,两组穴位交替使用。中频理疗组于腰部疼痛部位采用中频理疗。各组均每日治疗1次,6次为一疗程,共治疗2个疗程。观察各组疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)、腰部功能障碍指数评分(ODI)及临床疗效。结果:各组患者治疗后VAS评分、ODI评分均明显降低(P<0.05,P<0.01);龙虎交战针法组治疗后以上指标较其他两组降低更明显(均P<0.05)。龙虎交战针法组、平补平泻针法组和中频理疗组临床治愈率分别为30.0%(9/30)、23.3%(7/30)、16.7%(5/30),各组综合临床疗效比较,龙虎交战针法组优于其他两组(均P<0.05)。结论:龙虎交战针法治疗非特异性下背痛较平补平泻针法、中频理疗效果更好,是较好的镇痛针法之一。

Efficacy observation of nonspecific low back pain treated with the dragon-tiger fighting needling method

Objective To compare the difference in the clinical efficacy on nonspecific low back pain(NLBP) treated with the dragon-tiger fighting needling method,the uniform reinforcing-reducing method and the intermediate frequency physiotherapy.Methods Ninety cases of NLBP were randomly divided into a dragon-tiger fighting needling group(group A),an uniform reinforcing-reducing needling group(group B) and an intermediate frequency physiotherapy group(group C),30 cases in each one.In the group A,the dragon-tiger fighting needling method was used.In the group B,the uniform reinforcing-reducing method was applied.Two groups of acupoints were prescribed.One group included Shenshu(BL 23),Dachangshu(BL 25),Weizhong(BL 40) and Ashi points.The other group included Qihaishu(BL 24),Guanyuanshu(BL 26),Kunlun(BL 60),Yaoyangguan(GV 3).These two groups of acupoints were used alternatively in the above two groups.In the group C,the intermediate frequency physiotherapy was adopted in the pain area of the lumbar region.The treatment was given once per day in each group.Six treatments made one session.Totally,2 sessions were required.The Visual Analogue Scale(VAS),the Oswestry Disability Index(ODI) and the clinical efficacy were observed in each group.Results The scores of VAS and ODI were reduced obviously after treatment in each group(P<0.05,P<0.01).The score reducing in the group A was much more remarkable than those in the other two groups(all P<0.05).The clinical curative rate was 30.0%(9/30),23.3%(7/30) and 16.7%(5/30) in the group A,the group B and the group C,respectively.In comparison,the clinical efficacy in the group A was superior to that in either of the other groups(all P<0.05).Conclusion The dragon-tiger fighting needling method achieves the much better efficacy on NLBP compared with either the uniform reinforcing-reducing method or the intermediate frequency physiotherapy.It is one of the more effective needling method for analgesia.