CAJ | 학술논문

目的：比较针刺配合艾灸与针刺配合神灯治疗类风湿关节炎的临床疗效。方法将150例患者随机分为治疗组和对照组，每组75例，治疗组采用针刺配合艾灸治疗，对照组采用针刺配合神灯治疗，均治疗2个疗程。比较两组治疗前后VAS评分及临床体征分级与评分。结果两组治疗后VAS评分和临床体征评分均较治疗前明显改善(P＜0.05)。治疗组总有效率为93.3%，对照组为78.7%，两组比较差异具有统计学意义(P＜0.05)，治疗组明显优于对照组。结论针刺配合艾灸较针刺配合神灯治疗类风湿关节炎疗效明显。
목적：비교침자배합애구여침자배합신등치료류풍습관절염적림상료효。방법장150례환자수궤분위치료조화대조조，매조75례，치료조채용침자배합애구치료，대조조채용침자배합신등치료，균치료2개료정。비교량조치료전후VAS평분급림상체정분급여평분。결과량조치료후VAS평분화림상체정평분균교치료전명현개선(P＜0.05)。치료조총유효솔위93.3%，대조조위78.7%，량조비교차이구유통계학의의(P＜0.05)，치료조명현우우대조조。결론침자배합애구교침자배합신등치료류풍습관절염료효명현。
ObjectiveTo compare the clinical efficacies of acupuncture plus TDP lamp versus acupuncture plus moxibustion in treating rheumatoid arthritis.MethodOne hundred and fifty patients were randomly allocated to treatmentand control groups, 75 cases each. The treatment group received acupuncture plus moxibustion and the control group, acupuncture plus TDP radiation.Both groups were treated for two courses. The VAS scores and the clinical sign grades and scores were compared between the two groups before and after treatment.ResultThe VAS score and the clinical sign score improved in both groups after treatment compared with before (P<0.05). The total efficacy rate was 93.3% in the treatment group and 78.7% in the control group; there was a statistically significant difference between the two groups (P<0.05). The effect was better in the treatment group than in the control group.ConclusionAcupuncture plus moxibustion is more effective than acupuncture plus TDP lamp in treating rheumatoid arthritis.