浮针联合穴位贴敷对周围性面瘫病人疗效、面部残疾指数量表评分及抑郁自评量表评分的影响

目的 探究浮针联合穴位贴敷对周围性面瘫病人疗效、面部残疾指数量表评分及抑郁自评量表(SDS)评分的影响.方法 选取2015年3月至2017年6月收入湖南中医药高等专科学校附属第一医院治疗的周围性面瘫病人100例,以随机数字表法将其分为对照组(50例)和研究组(50例).对照组采用穴位贴敷法治疗,1次/天,贴敷6小时/次...

Effects of floating-needle therapy combined with acupoint application on the efficacy, facial disability index scale score and SDS score of palsypatients with peripheral facial palsy

Objective To explore the effects of floating-needle therapy combined with acupoint application on the efficacy, facialdisability index scale score and SDS score of palsypatients with peripheral facial palsy. Methods A hundred patients with peripheralfacial palsy who were admitted to The First Affiliated Hospital of Hunan Traditional Chinese Medical College from March 2015 to June2017 were selected, and according to the random number table method, were assigned into control group (50 cases) and research group(50 cases). The control group was treated with acupoint application, once a day, six hours a time, lasting for one month; the researchgroup was treated additionally with floating-needle therapy, once every two days, three times a week, lasting for one month. The House-Brackmann (HB) scale was used to determine the severity of facial palsy, the facial disability index (FDI) scale was used to evaluate thetherapeutic effects before and after treatment, the self-rating anxiety scale (SAS) was used to evaluate the anxiety symptoms of patients, the self-rating depression scale (SDS) was used to score depressive symptoms, and the sleep quality of patients with peripheral facialpalsy before and after treatment was evaluated by Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). Results After treatment, the total effectiverate of patients with peripheral facial palsy was 98.00% in the research group, significantly higher than 84.00% in the control group (P< 0.05). Before treatment, there were no significant differences in FDIP score [(16.02±2.94) vs. (15.65±2.32)], FDIS score [(24.11±3.31) vs. (24.63±2.86)], SDS score [(53.57±19.97) vs. (53.62±21.68)] between the research group and the control group (P>0.05); after treatment, the scores of FDIP and FDIS in the research group were (31.38±3.42) and (35.96±3.68) respectively, which were significantlyhigher than those before treatment and those [(24.45±3.05) and (30.76±3.12)] in the control group; the SDS score was (26.73±8.96),which was significantly lower than that before treatment and that [(38.15±10.58)] in the control group (P<0.05). Before treatment, there were no significant differences in HB grade, SAS score and PSQI score between the two groups (P>0.05). After treatment, HB grade,SAS score and PSQI score were significantly lower than those before treatment, and they were lower in the research group than in the