文献类型：期刊文献

中文题名：药物铺灸疗法治疗颈型颈椎病临床研究

英文题名：Clinical Study of Traditional Chinese Medicine Moxibustion in Treating Cervical Spondylosis

作者：李菊莲[1];赵彬元[2];范娥[1];刘丽艳[2];尹秦[1];何天有[1]

第一作者：李菊莲

机构：[1]甘肃中医学院附属医院,甘肃兰州730020;[2]甘肃中医学院,甘肃兰州730000

第一机构：甘肃中医药大学第二附属医院

年份：2011

卷号：18

期号：4

起止页码：7

中文期刊名：中国中医药信息杂志

外文期刊名：Chinese Journal of Information on Traditional Chinese Medicine

收录：CSTPCD;;CSCD:【CSCD_E2011_2012】；

基金：国家中医药管理局重点学科专项资金资助项目;兰州市科技局科研基金(2009-1-90);甘肃省科技成果鉴定项目(2010y0194)

语种：中文

中文关键词：药物铺灸疗法;颈型颈椎病;临床研究

外文关键词：traditional Chinese medicine moxibustion; cervical snondvlosis; clinical research

摘要：目的对比药物铺灸疗法、针刺疗法治疗颈型颈椎病的临床疗效,为优化颈型颈椎病的治疗方案提供临床依据。方法选择甘肃中医学院附属医院针灸科门诊与住院患者共120例,按患者就诊顺序随机分为2组,药物铺灸疗法组62例,针刺疗法组58例;以颈型颈椎病主要症状、体征分级量化计分表和NPQ颈痛量表为客观检测指标;2组治疗5、10 d后分别对疗效进行统计分析。结果 1个疗程后,铺灸组治愈率为20.97%,愈显率为56.45%;针刺组治愈率为12.07%,愈显率为34.48%。组间比较,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。第2个疗程后,铺灸组治愈率为55.74%,愈显率为90.16%;针刺组治愈率为53.45%,愈显率为87.93%。组间比较,差异无统计学意义。2组不良反应发生率与复发率均比较低。结论药物铺灸疗法临床疗效肯定,早期疗效更为显著,治疗过程较为轻松舒适。
Objective To contrast the clinical efficacy of traditional Chinese medicine practices of moxibustiort and acupuncture on patients with cervical spondylosis, and to provide clinical evidence for optimizing the treatment schemes of cervical spondylopathy. Methods One hundred and twenty hospitAliTed patients and outpatients of department of acupuncture and moxibustion of the Affiliated Hospital of Gansu TCM College were randomly divided by registration order into moxibustion group and acupuncture group of 62 cases and 58 cases. The objective indices included the main symptoms of cervical neck, the classification and quantification score sheet of signs, and the neck pain NPQ scale. Then statistical analysis of efficacy was made after 5 days and 10 days＇ treatment. Results After one course of treatment, the recovery rate in moxibustion group was 20.97% and the apparent efficient rate was 56.45%. The recovery rate in the acupuncture group was 12.07% and the apparent efficient rate was 34.48%. The difference between the two groups was statistically significant （P〈0.05）. After 2 courses of treatment, the recovery rate in moxibustion group was 55.74% and the apparent efficient rate was 90.16%. The recovery rate in the acupuncture group was 53.45% and the apparent efficient rate in it was 87.93%. There was no significant statistical difference between the two groups. Side effect rates and recurrence rates of the two groups were low. Conclusion The clinical efficacy of moxibustion is more positive, and the short-term outcome was better. The process of treatment is more relaxed and comfortable.