上海针灸杂志
上海針灸雜誌
상해침구잡지
SHANGHAI JOURNAL OF ACUPUNCTURE AND MOXIBUSTION
2014年
12期
1110-1113
,共4页
穴,四缝%点刺%捏脊%疳证
穴,四縫%點刺%捏脊%疳證
혈,사봉%점자%날척%감증
Point,Sifeng (EX-UE10)%Pricking%Chiropractics (TCM)%Infantile dyspepsia
目的：比较点刺四缝穴法、捏脊法、点刺四缝穴配合捏脊法治疗疳证的疗效差异。方法采取简单随机方法，将96例患者分为点刺组(32例)、捏脊组(32例)、联合组(32例)。治疗1个月为1个疗程。3组患者分别于治疗前和治疗1个疗程后采用症候积分量表评分，结合中医症状疗效标准评定疗效。结果各组治疗后症状总积分皆较治疗前明显低(P＜0.01)，提示3组均有效；3组治疗后症状总积分经方差分析两两比较，联合组治疗后症状总积分较点刺组、捏脊组降低(P＜0.05)。3组治疗方案对患者体重、身高的改善均无统计学差异(P＞0.05)；而对于食欲、精神、睡眠、多汗、感染、大便失调、腹胀、头发光泽度症状均有明显改善，差异有统计学意义(P＜0.01)。点刺组愈显率为51.6%，捏脊组为48.4%，联合组为77.4%；联合组与点刺组、捏脊组经两两比较临床疗效差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05)，说明联合组临床疗效优于点刺组及捏脊组。结论点刺四缝穴、捏脊及二者联合3种治疗方案均能明显改善疳证的临床症状，二者联合法的临床疗效明显优于单纯采用点刺四缝穴法和捏脊法。
目的：比較點刺四縫穴法、捏脊法、點刺四縫穴配閤捏脊法治療疳證的療效差異。方法採取簡單隨機方法，將96例患者分為點刺組(32例)、捏脊組(32例)、聯閤組(32例)。治療1箇月為1箇療程。3組患者分彆于治療前和治療1箇療程後採用癥候積分量錶評分，結閤中醫癥狀療效標準評定療效。結果各組治療後癥狀總積分皆較治療前明顯低(P＜0.01)，提示3組均有效；3組治療後癥狀總積分經方差分析兩兩比較，聯閤組治療後癥狀總積分較點刺組、捏脊組降低(P＜0.05)。3組治療方案對患者體重、身高的改善均無統計學差異(P＞0.05)；而對于食欲、精神、睡眠、多汗、感染、大便失調、腹脹、頭髮光澤度癥狀均有明顯改善，差異有統計學意義(P＜0.01)。點刺組愈顯率為51.6%，捏脊組為48.4%，聯閤組為77.4%；聯閤組與點刺組、捏脊組經兩兩比較臨床療效差異有統計學意義(P＜0.05)，說明聯閤組臨床療效優于點刺組及捏脊組。結論點刺四縫穴、捏脊及二者聯閤3種治療方案均能明顯改善疳證的臨床癥狀，二者聯閤法的臨床療效明顯優于單純採用點刺四縫穴法和捏脊法。
목적：비교점자사봉혈법、날척법、점자사봉혈배합날척법치료감증적료효차이。방법채취간단수궤방법，장96례환자분위점자조(32례)、날척조(32례)、연합조(32례)。치료1개월위1개료정。3조환자분별우치료전화치료1개료정후채용증후적분량표평분，결합중의증상료효표준평정료효。결과각조치료후증상총적분개교치료전명현저(P＜0.01)，제시3조균유효；3조치료후증상총적분경방차분석량량비교，연합조치료후증상총적분교점자조、날척조강저(P＜0.05)。3조치료방안대환자체중、신고적개선균무통계학차이(P＞0.05)；이대우식욕、정신、수면、다한、감염、대편실조、복창、두발광택도증상균유명현개선，차이유통계학의의(P＜0.01)。점자조유현솔위51.6%，날척조위48.4%，연합조위77.4%；연합조여점자조、날척조경량량비교림상료효차이유통계학의의(P＜0.05)，설명연합조림상료효우우점자조급날척조。결론점자사봉혈、날척급이자연합3충치료방안균능명현개선감증적림상증상，이자연합법적림상료효명현우우단순채용점자사봉혈법화날척법。
ObjectiveTo compare the therapeutic efficacies of pricking Sifeng (EX-UE10), spine pinching, and the combination of pricking Sifeng and spine pinching in treating infantile dyspepsia.MethodBy simple randomization, ninety-six patients were divided into a pricking group (n=32), a spine pinching group (n=32), and a combination group (n=32). One-month treatment was considered as a course. Before treatment and after 1 treatment course, the 3 groups were evaluated by symptom scale and the criteria of symptom and therapeutic efficacy of traditional Chinese medicine to determine the therapeutic efficacy. ResultThe total symptom score decreased significantly in the three groups after treatment (P<0.01), indicating that the three treatment protocols were all effective; according to the paired comparison of the post-treatment total symptom score by using Chi-square test, the score of the combination group was significantly lower than that of the other two groups (P<0.05). The improvement of body weight and height was statistically insignificant in the three groups (P>0.05); while the improvements of appetite, vitality, sleep, hyperidrosis, infection, irregular defecation, abdominal bloating, and hairglossiness were statistically significant in the three groups (P<0.01). The recovery and markedly-effective rate was 51.6% in the pricking group, 48.4% in the spine pinching group, and 77.4% in the combination group; the therapeutic efficacy of the combination group was significantly higher than that of the other two groups (P<0.05).ConclusionThe three treatment protocols, i.e. pricking Sifeng, spine pinching, and the combination of the two methods, all can effectively improve the symptoms of infantiledyspepsia, while the therapeutic efficacy of the combination protocol is superior to the two methods usedseparately.
