正中神经电刺激并穴位针刺治疗重症颅脑损伤的疗效分析

【目的】探讨正中神经电刺激并穴位针刺治疗重症颅脑损伤的疗效。【方法】选取重症颅脑损伤患者60例，根据患者意愿分成对照组和观察组各30例，对照组行单纯正中神经电刺激，观察组在对照组的基础上加用针刺。测定治疗前、治疗2周后脑脊液中β-内啡肽水平和格拉斯哥昏迷（GCS）评分，在治疗一个月后测定患者的格拉斯哥结果（GOS）评分、语言功能和运动功能，综合评估患者的生活质量。【结果】两组治疗前GCS评分和β-内啡肽水平比较无显著性差异（P〉0．05），两组治疗后GCS评分和β-内啡肽水平与治疗前比较、两组治疗后比较均有统计学差异（P〈0．05），治疗一个月后，观察组GOS评分、语言功能评分、运动功能评分、生活质量评估优于对照组，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。【结论】正中神经电刺激并穴位针刺治疗重症颅脑损伤疗效满意，值得临床推广。

Analysis on the Efficacy of Median Nerve Electrical Stimulation and Point Acupuncture for the Treatment of Severe Craniocerebral Injury

ObjectivelTo explore the efficacy of median nerve electrical stimulation and point acupuncture for the treatment of severe craniocerebral injury. Methods] A total of 60 patients with severe craniocerebral injury were chosen. According to voluntary principle, all patients were assigned to the control group and the treatment group. The control group was treated with median nerve eleetrieal stimulation only, while the treatment group was treated with point acupuncture on the basis of the control group, β-endorphin（β-EP） blood plasma and Glasgow co- ma score（GCS） before and 2 weeks after treatment were measured. Glasgow outcome score（GOS）, linguistic and motor function in patients one month after treatment were measured. The quality of life of patients was assessed. Results]There were no significant difference in GCS and β-EP between two groups before treatment（ P〉0.05）, while there were significant differences in GCS and β-EP between two groups after treatment（ P〈0.05）. GOS, Linguistic and motor function score and quality of life in treatment group one month after treatment were better than those in control group, and there were significant differences（ P 〈0.05）. Conclusion] Median nerve electrical stimulation and point acupuncture for the treatment of severe craniocerebral injury has satisfactory efficacy, so it is worthy of clinical promotion.