Hsieh C L, Li T C, Lin C Y, Tang N Y, Chang Q Y, Lin J G
School of Chinese Medicine, China Medical College, Taichung, Taiwan.
Am J Chin Med. 1998;26(3-4):265-74. doi: 10.1142/S0192415X98000300.
Although acupuncture has traditionally used the acupoints formula to treat diseases, the physiological mechanisms involved and the effectiveness of therapy remain unclear. This study investigated the physiological mechanism(s) and response to acupuncture stimulation using the acupoints formula. Scalp-recorded potentials P300 were evoked by auditory stimulation of non-target and target in 13 normal adult volunteers. Latencies and amplitudes were measured. Three assessments were performed in each subject over a period of at least one week. Each assessment was divided into a control period with no acupuncture stimulation, followed by an acupuncture period and then a post-acupuncture period. Acupuncture needles were inserted into the body as follows: 1) non-acupoint: acupuncture needles were inserted 2 cm lateral to both Zusanli acupoints; 2) acupoint: acupuncture needles were inserted into both Zusanli acupoints; 3) acupoints formula: acupuncture needles were inserted into both Zusanli and Shousanli acupoints. Our results showed that both acupoint and acupoints formula assessments resulted in a significant decrease of P300 amplitudes during the acupuncture and post-acupuncture periods. However, there was significant difference in P300 amplitudes in the non-acupoint assessment during these periods. P300 changes in latencies and amplitudes were not significantly different between the acupoint assessment and the acupoints formula assessment. We concluded that acupuncture stimulation of both Zusanli acupoints resulted in a decrease of P300 amplitudes, suggesting the involvement of the cerebral cortex in sensory interaction when simultaneous sensations of the two types are received. No similar changes were observed in the non-acupoint assessment, which have been suggested to be related to so-called acupoint specificity. Results obtained using the acupoints formula were not significantly different from those using acupoints alone. These findings suggested that neuropsychological effects from stimulation of Zusanli acupoints and Shousanli acupoints are different.
尽管传统上针灸使用穴位配方来治疗疾病，但其中涉及的生理机制和治疗效果仍不清楚。本研究调查了使用穴位配方时的生理机制以及对针刺刺激的反应。对13名正常成年志愿者进行非靶标和靶标的听觉刺激，诱发头皮记录电位P300，测量其潜伏期和波幅。在至少一周的时间内，对每个受试者进行三次评估。每次评估分为无针刺刺激的对照期、针刺期和针刺后期。针灸针按以下方式刺入身体：1）非穴位：在双侧足三里穴外侧2厘米处刺入针灸针；2）穴位：将针灸针插入双侧足三里穴；3）穴位配方：将针灸针插入双侧足三里穴和手三里穴。我们的结果表明，穴位评估和穴位配方评估在针刺期和针刺后期均导致P300波幅显著降低。然而，在这些时期的非穴位评估中，P300波幅存在显著差异。穴位评估和穴位配方评估之间P300潜伏期和波幅的变化无显著差异。我们得出结论，针刺双侧足三里穴可导致P300波幅降低，这表明当同时接收到两种类型的感觉时，大脑皮层参与了感觉交互作用。在非穴位评估中未观察到类似变化，这被认为与所谓的穴位特异性有关。使用穴位配方获得的结果与仅使用穴位获得的结果无显著差异。这些发现表明，刺激足三里穴和手三里穴产生的神经心理学效应是不同的。
