Wang Yan-Ling
Department of Acupuncture and Moxibustion, Tianping Street Community Health Service Center of Xuhui District, Shanghai 200031, China.
Zhongguo Zhen Jiu. 2013 Jul;33(7):605-8.
To observe the differences in the clinical therapeutic effects on lumbar disc herniation among warm needling therapy, electroacupuncture therapy and common acupuncture therapy.
One hundred and thirty-six cases of lumbar disc herniation were randomized into a warm needling group (46 cases), an electroacupuncture group (45 cases) and a common acupuncture group (45 cases). The points were the same in the three groups. The main points were Shiqizhui (EX-B 8), Yaoyangguan (GV 3), Huantiao (GB 30), Yanglingquan (GB 34), Jiaji (EX-B 2) (corresponding tender points). In the warm manipulation group, the warm and dredging manipulation was adopted. In the electroacupuncture group, G6805- II electric acupuncture apparatus was attached. In the common acupuncture group, only common needling therapy was applied without any specific manipulation supplemented. In all of the three groups, the treatment was given once every two days, 10 treatments made one session. After one session of treatment, the comprehensive assessment score of the chief symptoms and physical signs, VAS score and the clinical efficacy were compared among the three groups.
The score of the chief symptoms and physical signs and VAS score after treatment were all reduced as compared with those before treatment in all of the three groups, indicating the statistically significant differences (P < 0.05). All of the three therapies could relieve the chief symptoms and physical signs of lumbar disc herniation. After treatment, the total effective rate was 89.1% (41/46) in the warm manipulation group, 88.9% (40/50) in the electroacupuncture group and 71.1% (32/45) in the common acupuncture group. The efficacies were not different apparently between the warm manipulation group and the electroacupuncture group (P > 0.05). The efficacies in the warm manipulation group and the electroacupuncture group were all superior to the common acupuncture group (P < 0.05).
The efficacies of the warm and dredging manipulation and the electroacupuncture therapy are superior to the common acupuncture therapy in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation.
观察温针疗法、电针疗法与普通针刺疗法治疗腰椎间盘突出症的临床疗效差异。
将136例腰椎间盘突出症患者随机分为温针组（46例）、电针组（45例）和普通针刺组（45例）。三组取穴相同。主穴为十七椎（EX - B 8）、腰阳关（GV 3）、环跳（GB 30）、阳陵泉（GB 34）、夹脊（EX - B 2）（相应压痛点）。温针组采用温通手法；电针组连接G6805 - II型电针仪；普通针刺组仅采用普通针刺疗法且不辅以任何特殊手法。三组均每2天治疗1次，10次治疗为1个疗程。治疗1个疗程后，比较三组主症与体征综合评定评分、视觉模拟评分法（VAS）评分及临床疗效。
三组治疗后主症与体征评分及VAS评分均较治疗前降低，差异有统计学意义（P < 0.05）。三种疗法均能缓解腰椎间盘突出症的主症与体征。治疗后，温针组总有效率为89.1%（41/46），电针组为88.9%（40/50），普通针刺组为71.1%（32/45）。温针组与电针组疗效差异不明显（P > 0.05）。温针组与电针组疗效均优于普通针刺组（P < 0.05）。
温通手法与电针疗法治疗腰椎间盘突出症的疗效优于普通针刺疗法。
