Wang Yanwu, Wang Chongmin, Chen Huade, Ye Xinmiao
Department of Acupuncture and Moxibustion Guangxing Hospital Affiliated to Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou 310007, China.
Zhejiang Chinese Medical University.
Zhongguo Zhen Jiu. 2018 Jan 12;38(1):17-21. doi: 10.13703/j.0255-2930.2018.01.004.
To verify the clinical therapeutic effects on shoulder joint pain of rotator cuff injury treated with electroacupuncture (EA) and Mulligan's mobilization.
A total of 120 patients of shoulder joint pain of rotator cuff injury were randomized into an EA group, a rehabilitation group and a combined therapy group, 40 cases in each one. In the EA group, EA was applied to Jianzhen (SI 9), Jianliao (TE 14), Jianyu (LI 15), Tianzong (SI 11), Jianqian (extra) and Binao (LI 14) in the affected side. Of these acupoints, Jianliao (TE 14) and Jianyu (LI 15), Jianzhen (SI 9) and Tianzong (SI 11) were stimulated with 's electric apparatus. In the rehabilitation group, Mulligan's mobilization was used, including scapular mobilization, static joint mobilization and dynamic joint mobilization. In the combined therapy group, EA was used in combination with Mulligan mobilization. The treatment was given once a day in each group, 5 sessions a week, totally for 6 weeks. The pain intensity of shoulder joint (VAS), the University of California at Los Angeles shoulder rating scale (UCLA) and the range of motion (ROM) of shoulder joint were evaluated before and 6 weeks after treatment separately. The adverse reactions were recorded in each group.
VAS scores were all reduced, UCLA scores increased and ROM improved after treatment as compared with those before treatment in the patients of the three groups (all <0.05). After treatment, VAS score, UCLA score and ROM in the combined therapy group were remarkably improved as compared with those in the EA group and the rehabilitation group (all <0.05). Regarding the improvements of VAS and UCLA scores, the results in the EA group were better than those in the rehabilitation group (both <0.05). Regarding ROM improvement, the results in the rehabilitation group were superior to those in the EA group (all <0.05). There was no adverse reaction in the two groups.
The combined therapy of EA and Mulligan's mobilization relieves shoulder joint pain of rotator cuff injury, better than the simple application of either EA or Mulligan's mobilization.
验证电针（EA）与Mulligan松动术治疗肩袖损伤性肩关节疼痛的临床疗效。
将120例肩袖损伤性肩关节疼痛患者随机分为电针组、康复组和联合治疗组，每组40例。电针组针刺患侧肩贞（SI 9）、肩髎（TE 14）、肩髃（LI 15）、天宗（SI 11）、肩前（奇穴）和臂臑（LI 14）。其中，肩髎（TE 14）与肩髃（LI 15）、肩贞（SI 9）与天宗（SI 11）用电子针疗仪刺激。康复组采用Mulligan松动术，包括肩胛骨松动、静态关节松动和动态关节松动。联合治疗组采用电针与Mulligan松动术相结合的方法。每组每天治疗1次，每周5次，共治疗6周。分别于治疗前和治疗6周后评估肩关节疼痛强度（视觉模拟评分法，VAS）、美国加州大学洛杉矶分校肩关节评分量表（UCLA）及肩关节活动度（ROM）。记录每组的不良反应。
与治疗前比较,三组患者治疗后VAS评分均降低，UCLA评分升高，ROM改善（均P<0.05）。治疗后，联合治疗组VAS评分、UCLA评分及ROM改善情况均明显优于电针组和康复组（均P<0.05）。在VAS和UCLA评分改善方面，电针组结果优于康复组（均P<0.05）。在ROM改善方面，康复组结果优于电针组（均P<0.05）。两组均未出现不良反应。
电针与Mulligan松动术联合治疗肩袖损伤性肩关节疼痛的效果优于单纯应用电针或Mulligan松动术。
