Hsieh Lisa Li-Chen, Kuo Chung-Hung, Yen Ming-Fang, Chen Tony Hsiu-Hsi
Institute of Prevention Medicine, College of Public Health, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Prev Med. 2004 Jul;39(1):168-76. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2004.01.036.
Although acupressure has been reported to be effective in managing various types of pain, its efficacy in relieving pain associated with low back pain (LBP) remains unclear. The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of acupressure with that of physical therapy in reducing low back pain.
A randomized controlled clinical trial in an orthopedic referral hospital in Taiwan was conducted between December 20, 2000, and March 2, 2001. A total of 146 participants with chronic low back pain were randomly assigned to the acupressure group (69) or the physical therapy group (77), each with a different treatment technique. Self-appraised pain scores were obtained before treatment as baseline and after treatment as outcomes using the Chinese version of Short-Form Pain Questionnaire (SF-PQ).
There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics among patients randomized into the two groups. The mean of posttreatment pain score after a 4-week treatment (2.28, SD = 2.62) in the acupressure group was significantly lower than that in the physical therapy group (5.05, SD = 5.11) (P = 0.0002). At the 6-month follow-up assessment, the mean of pain score in the acupressure group (1.08, SD = 1.43) was still significantly lower than that in the physical therapy group (3.15, SD = 3.62) (P = 0.0004).
Our results suggest that acupressure is another effective alternative medicine in reducing low back pain, although the standard operating procedures involved with acupressure treatment should be carefully assessed in the future.
尽管据报道指压疗法在管理各类疼痛方面有效,但其缓解与腰痛(LBP)相关疼痛的功效仍不明确。本研究的目的是比较指压疗法与物理治疗在减轻腰痛方面的功效。
2000年12月20日至2001年3月2日在台湾一家骨科转诊医院进行了一项随机对照临床试验。共有146名慢性腰痛患者被随机分配到指压疗法组(69名)或物理治疗组(77名),每组采用不同的治疗技术。使用中文版简短疼痛问卷(SF-PQ)在治疗前获取自我评估疼痛评分作为基线,并在治疗后作为结果。
随机分为两组的患者在基线特征方面无显著差异。指压疗法组在4周治疗后的治疗后疼痛评分均值(2.28,标准差=2.62)显著低于物理治疗组(5.05,标准差=5.11)(P = 0.0002)。在6个月的随访评估中,指压疗法组的疼痛评分均值(1.08,标准差=1.43)仍显著低于物理治疗组(3.15,标准差=3.62)(P = 0.0004)。
我们的结果表明,指压疗法是减轻腰痛的另一种有效替代医学,尽管未来应仔细评估指压疗法治疗所涉及的标准操作程序。