Al-Eidi Sulaiman M, Mohamed Ashry Gad, Abutalib Raid A, AlBedah Abdullah M, Khalil Mohamed K M
National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, Ministry of Health, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Department of Community Medicine, King Saudi University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
J Acupunct Meridian Stud. 2019 Dec;12(6):173-181. doi: 10.1016/j.jams.2019.04.005. Epub 2019 Apr 24.
To evaluate the feasibility of comparing the effect of the traditional Hijamah and the Asian wet cupping techniques in the management of patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP), a randomized clinical trial comparing traditional and Asian wet cupping techniques for CLBP was conducted in two secondary care hospitals in Saudi Arabia. Seventy eligible participants with CLBP were randomized to receive one session of wet cupping using either Asian technique (34 patients) or traditional Hijamah technique (36 patients). Cupping was performed at four sites of the bilateral bladder meridian (BL23, BL24, and BL25). The numeric rating scale, Present Pain Intensity, and Oswestry Disability Questionnaire scores were measured immediately after intervention, at seven days, and 14 days after intervention. In both groups, there was a significant decrease in the numeric rating scale, Present Pain Intensity, and Oswestry Disability Questionnaire scores, immediately after intervention, at seven days, and 14 days after intervention. However, there was no significant difference between the two groups across all the outcome measures up to 14 days after intervention. The study did not show a superiority of one technique compared with the other. Longer follow-up periods and more than one cupping session may be needed to evaluate the difference, if any, between both the techniques. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02012205.
为评估比较传统拔罐疗法和亚洲火罐疗法对慢性下腰痛(CLBP)患者治疗效果的可行性,在沙特阿拉伯的两家二级护理医院进行了一项比较传统拔罐疗法和亚洲火罐疗法治疗CLBP的随机临床试验。70名符合条件的CLBP患者被随机分为两组,分别接受一次亚洲火罐疗法(34例患者)或传统拔罐疗法(36例患者)。拔罐部位为双侧膀胱经的四个穴位(BL23、BL24和BL25)。在干预后即刻、干预后7天和14天测量数字评分量表、当前疼痛强度和奥斯维斯特功能障碍问卷得分。两组患者在干预后即刻、干预后7天和14天的数字评分量表、当前疼痛强度和奥斯维斯特功能障碍问卷得分均显著降低。然而,在干预后14天内,两组在所有结局指标上均无显著差异。该研究未显示一种技术优于另一种技术。可能需要更长的随访期和不止一次的拔罐疗程来评估两种技术之间是否存在差异。试验注册号:NCT02012205。