文献类型：期刊文献

中文题名：温通针法治疗干眼症疗效观察

英文题名：Efficacy observation of xerophthalmia treated with acupuncture of warming-promotion needling technique

作者：徐兴华[1];方晓丽[1]

第一作者：徐兴华

机构：[1]甘肃中医学院针灸推拿系

第一机构：甘肃中医药大学针灸推拿学院

年份：2012

卷号：32

期号：3

起止页码：233

中文期刊名：中国针灸

外文期刊名：Chinese Acupuncture & Moxibustion

收录：MEDLINE(收录号：22471138);CSTPCD;;Scopus(收录号：2-s2.0-84860552868);北大核心:【北大核心2011】；CSCD:【CSCD_E2011_2012】；PubMed;

语种：中文

中文关键词：干眼症;针灸疗法;温针疗法;穴,风池

外文关键词：Xerophthalmia; Acupuncture; Needle Warming Therapy; Point GB 20 （Fengchi）

摘要：目的:比较以风池穴为主运用温通针法与常规针刺法治疗干眼症的疗效差异。方法:将30例患者随机分为温通针法组(15例)和常规针刺组(15例)。温通针法组采用风池穴运用温通针法,并配合眼局部、远端取穴(攒竹下、内关、光明、太冲、复溜、三阴交)和头针(双侧枕上旁线、枕上正中线)针刺,运用捻转平补平泻法;常规针刺组取穴与温通针法组相同,均运用捻转平补平泻法。治疗2个疗程后,比较两组疗效、泪液分泌量与症状总评分。结果:温通针法组的总有效率为86.7%(13/15),优于常规针刺组的66.7%(10/15)(P<0.05);两组治疗后基础泪液分泌量、症状总评分均明显改善(均P<0.05),其中温通针法组改善更明显(均P<0.05)。结论:温通针法治疗干眼症疗效明显优于常规针刺。
Objective To observe the differences in the efficacy on xerophthalmia treated with the needling tech- nique for warming-promotion at Fengchi （GB 20） as the main acupoint in comparison with the conventional nee dling technique. Methods Thirty cases were randomly divided into a warming-promotion needling group （n=15） and a rouline needling group （n=15）. In warming-promotion needling group, the needling technique for warming- promotion was applied to Fengchi （GB 20）. Additionally, the local and distal acupoints [such as the point beneath Cuanzu （BI. 2）, Neiguan （PC 6）, Guangming （GB 37）, Taiehong （LR 3）, Fuliu （KI 7） and Sanyinjiao （SP 6）], as well as the scalp acupuncture （bilateral supraoccipital lateral line and supraoccipital midline） were selected and stimulated with even-needling technique by rotating the needle. In routine needling group, the acupoints were sameas warming-promotion needling group and were stimulated with even-needling technique by rotating the needle. After 2 sessions of treatment, the efficacy, tear secretion volume and the total score of symptoms were compared be- tween two groups. Results The total effective rate was 86.7% （13/15） in warming-promotion needling group, which was superior to 66.7% （10/15） in routine needling group （P〈（0.05）. After treatment, the tear secretion volume and the total score of symptoms were all apparently improved in two groups （all P〈0.05）, in which, the improvement in warming-promotion needling group was much obvious （all P〈0.05）. Conclusion The therapeutic effect of warming-promotion needling technique is apparently superior to that of conventional one.