Yang Jun-Xiong, Xiang Kai-Wei, Zhang Jian-Ping, Zhang Yu-Xue, Jiang Feng-Xian
Acupuncture-Moxibustion Department, Affiliated Hospital of Tongren Polytechnic, Tongren 554300, Guizhou Province, China.
Zhongguo Zhen Jiu. 2012 Oct;32(10):882-6.
To compare the differences in the clinical efficacy on tinnitus between the spinal balancing intervention and the conventional acupuncture.
The randomized controlled trial were adopted. One hundred and twenty cases of tinnitus were randomized into a spinal balancing group and a conventional acupuncture group, 60 cases in each one. In the spinal balancing group, the comprehensive therapy of acu-puncture and Tuina was applied to the spine, the Back-shu points, Jiaji (EX-B 2), Tinggong (SI 19), Yifeng (TE 17), Fengchi (GB 20), Yuzhen (BL 9), Tianzhu (BL 10), etc. for the balancing intervention. In the conventional acupuncture group, acupuncture was applied to the local points and the points along the affected meridians. In each group, after 3 sessions of treatment, the degree of tinnitus and the accompanied symptoms were scored and compared before and after treatment. The comprehensive efficacy was assessed.
In the spinal balancing group, the clinical curative rate was 70.0% (42/60) and the total effective rate was 98.3% (59/60), which were significantly better than 45.0% (27/60) and 86.7% (52/60) in the conventional acupuncture group separately (P < 0.01, P < 0.05). After treatment, the degree of tinnitus and the accompanied symptom scores were all reduced in both groups (all P < 0.05), but the improvements in the spinal balancing group were better than those in the conventional acupuncture group (all P < 0.05). In 3-month follow-up visit after treatment, the recurrence rate in the spinal balancing group was lower than that in the conventional acupuncture group [5.1% (3/59) vs 13.5% (7/52)] (P < 0.05).
The spinal balancing intervention therapy relieves the symptoms of the patients with tinnitus remarkably. Its clinical efficacy is superior significantly to that of the conventional acupuncture and the recurrence rate is lower.
比较脊柱平衡干预与传统针刺治疗耳鸣的临床疗效差异。
采用随机对照试验。将120例耳鸣患者随机分为脊柱平衡组和传统针刺组，每组60例。脊柱平衡组采用针刺和推拿综合疗法对脊柱、背俞穴、夹脊穴（EX - B 2）、听宫（SI 19）、翳风（TE 17）、风池（GB 20）、玉枕（BL 9）、天柱（BL 10）等进行平衡干预。传统针刺组针刺局部穴位及患侧经络沿线穴位。每组治疗3个疗程后，对耳鸣程度及伴随症状进行治疗前后评分并比较，评估综合疗效。
脊柱平衡组临床治愈率为70.0%（42/60），总有效率为98.3%（59/60），分别显著优于传统针刺组的45.0%（27/60）和86.7%（52/60）（P < 0.01，P < 0.05）。治疗后，两组耳鸣程度及伴随症状评分均降低（均P < 0.05），但脊柱平衡组改善情况优于传统针刺组（均P < 0.05）。治疗后3个月随访，脊柱平衡组复发率低于传统针刺组[5.1%（3/59）比13.5%（7/52）]（P < 0.05）。
脊柱平衡干预疗法能显著缓解耳鸣患者症状，其临床疗效显著优于传统针刺，且复发率更低。
