扳机点针刺与其他针刺治疗慢性颈部疼痛的随机试验。
Randomised trial of trigger point acupuncture compared with other acupuncture for treatment of chronic neck pain.
作者信息
Itoh Kazunori, Katsumi Yasukazu, Hirota Satoko, Kitakoji Hiroshi
机构信息
Department of Clinical Acupuncture and Moxibustion, Meiji University of Oriental Medicine, Kyoto 629-0392, Japan.
出版信息
Complement Ther Med. 2007 Sep;15(3):172-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ctim.2006.05.003. Epub 2006 Jul 10.
INTRODUCTION
There is some evidence for the efficacy of acupuncture in chronic neck pain (CNP) treatment, but it remains unclear which acupuncture modes are most effective. Objective was to evaluate the effects of trigger point acupuncture on pain and quality of life (QOL) in CNP patients compared to three other acupuncture treatments (acupoints, non-trigger point and sham treatment).
METHODS
Forty out-patients (29 women, 11 men; age range: 47-80 years) from the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Meiji University of Oriental Medicine, with non-radiating CNP for at least 6 months and normal neurological examination were randomised to one of four groups over 13 weeks. Each group received two phases of acupuncture treatment with an interval between them. The acupoint group (standard acupuncture; SA, n=10) received treatment at traditional acupoints for neck pain, the trigger point (TrP, n=10) and non-trigger point (non-TrP, n=10) groups received treatment at tenderness points for the same muscle, while the other acupuncture group received sham treatments on the trigger point (SH, n=10). Outcome measures were pain intensity (visual analogue scale; VAS 0-100mm) and disease specific questionnaire (neck disability index; NDI, 60-point scale).
RESULTS
After treatment, the TrP group reported less pain intensity and improved QOL compared to the SA or non-TrP group. There was significant reduction in pain intensity between the treatment and the interval for the TrP group (p<0.01, Dunnett's multiple test), but not for the SA or non-TrP group.
CONCLUSION
These results suggest that trigger point acupuncture therapy may be more effective on chronic neck pain in aged patients than the standard acupuncture therapy.
引言
有证据表明针刺疗法对慢性颈部疼痛(CNP)的治疗有效,但哪种针刺模式最有效仍不清楚。目的是评估与其他三种针刺疗法(穴位、非触发点和假治疗)相比,触发点针刺对CNP患者疼痛和生活质量(QOL)的影响。
方法
从明治东方医学大学骨科门诊选取40例门诊患者(29例女性,11例男性;年龄范围:47 - 80岁),患有非放射性CNP至少6个月且神经学检查正常,在13周内随机分为四组。每组接受两个阶段的针刺治疗,中间有间隔。穴位组(标准针刺;SA,n = 10)在治疗颈部疼痛的传统穴位接受治疗,触发点组(TrP,n = 10)和非触发点组(非TrP,n = 10)在同一肌肉的压痛点接受治疗,而另一针刺组在触发点接受假治疗(SH,n = 10)。观察指标为疼痛强度(视觉模拟评分法;VAS 0 - 100mm)和疾病特异性问卷(颈部功能障碍指数;NDI,60分制)。
结果
治疗后,与SA组或非TrP组相比,TrP组报告的疼痛强度更低,生活质量得到改善。TrP组治疗与间隔期之间的疼痛强度有显著降低(p < 0.01,Dunnett多重检验),但SA组或非TrP组没有。
结论
这些结果表明,触发点针刺疗法对老年患者的慢性颈部疼痛可能比标准针刺疗法更有效。