Complex Operative Unit of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, University of Rome La Sapienza, Piazzale Aldo Moro, 5, 00185, Rome, Italy.
Complement Ther Med. 2011 Feb;19(1):19-26. doi: 10.1016/j.ctim.2010.11.002. Epub 2010 Dec 15.
The goal of this study was to compare the effects of trigger point (TRP) mesotherapy and acupuncture (ACP) mesotherapy in the treatment of patients with chronic low back pain.
Short term randomized controlled trial.
62 subjects with chronic low back pain were recruited at outpatients Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Clinic at the University of Rome "La Sapienza" in the period between July 2006 and May 2008.
Study subjects were assigned to receive 4 weeks treatments with either trigger point mesotherapy (TRP mesotherapy, n=29) or acupoints mesotherapy (ACP mesotherapy, n=33).
Pain intensity with a pain visual analogic scale (VAS) and verbal rating scale (VRS) and pain disability with McGill Pain Questionnaire Short Form (SFMPQ), Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMQ) and Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionaire (ODQ).
ACP mesotherapy shows a more effective results in VRS and VAS measures in the follow-up (p(VRS)=<.001 and p(VAS)=<.001). The SF-MPQ measure shows a better results for ACP instead of TRP with statistically significant differences between groups and time (p=.035). Participants reported a slight discomfort at the time of the inoculation, and 15% reported slight neck pain in ACP mesotherapy group.
Our results suggest that the response to ACP mesotherapy may be greater than the response to TRP mesotherapy in the short term follow-up. This technique could be nevertheless a viable option as an adjunct treatment in an overall treatment planning of CLBP.
本研究旨在比较触发点(TRP)穴位注射疗法与针刺穴位注射疗法(ACP 穴位注射疗法)治疗慢性下背痛患者的疗效。
短期随机对照试验。
2006 年 7 月至 2008 年 5 月期间,在罗马大学“拉萨皮恩扎”大学门诊物理医学和康复诊所共招募了 62 名慢性下背痛患者。
研究对象被随机分为两组,分别接受 4 周的触发点穴位注射疗法(TRP 穴位注射疗法,n=29)或穴位注射疗法(ACP 穴位注射疗法,n=33)治疗。
疼痛强度采用视觉模拟评分法(VAS)和口述评分法(VRS)进行评估,疼痛残疾程度采用 McGill 疼痛问卷简表(SFMPQ)、Roland Morris 残疾问卷(RMQ)和 Oswestry 下腰痛残疾问卷(ODQ)进行评估。
ACP 穴位注射疗法在随访时 VRS 和 VAS 测量结果更有效(p(VRS)<.001 和 p(VAS)<.001)。SF-MPQ 测量结果显示,ACP 组的疗效优于 TRP 组,组间和时间差异具有统计学意义(p=.035)。参与者在接种时报告轻微不适,15%的 ACP 穴位注射疗法组报告有轻微颈部疼痛。
我们的结果表明,在短期随访中,ACP 穴位注射疗法的反应可能大于 TRP 穴位注射疗法。然而,作为慢性下背痛整体治疗计划的辅助治疗方法,该技术可能是一种可行的选择。