摘要
为探求治疗椎动脉型颈椎病的理想方法。将 32 6例患者随机分成 4组 ,分别采用针刺疗法、旋牵手法、小针刀疗法和小针刀配合旋牵手法等不同方法治疗 ,按规定疗程治疗后进行疗效评定。结果显示 ,针刺组总有效率 85 .5 2 % ,显效率 6 5 .79% ;手法组总有效率 88.4 1% ,显效率 6 8.12 % ;针刀组总有效率 95 .4 0 % ,显效率 83.91% ;针刀加手法组总有效率 10 0 % ,显效率 97.87%。经 χ2 检验 ,在两两比较中 ,针刺组与手法组在显效率及总有效率上均无显著差别 (P >0 .0 5 ) ;针刀组与手法组相比较 ,虽在总有效率上无显著差别 (P >0 .0 5 ) ,而显效率却有显著差别 (P <0 .0 5 ) ;针刀配合手法组与针刀组比较 ,不但总有效率有显著差别 (P <0 .0 5 ) ,显效率差别更加显著 (P <0 .0 1)。认为小针刀配合旋牵手法治疗椎动脉型颈椎病疗效显著 ,优于其他疗法 ,是治疗椎动脉型颈椎病的一种较理想的方法。
In order to seek the rational method for treating cervical spondylotic vertebral arteriopathy (CSA), 326 cases of CSA were randomly divided into four groups, which were treated by acupuncture therapy (A), rotating-pulling manipulations (M), scalpel therapy (S), and S and M (SM), respectively. After the treatment for the stipulated courses, the therapeutic effects of the four groups were evaluated. The results showed that the total effective and markedly effective rates of Group A, Group M, Group S and Group SM were 85.52 % and 65.79 %, 88.41 % and 68.12 %, 95.40 % and 83.91 %, 100 % and 97.87 %, respectively. Through X2 test, the two-to-two comparison showed that Group A and Group M had no significant difference in the total effective and markedly effective rates (P > 0.05); Group S and Group M had no significant difference in the total effective rate (P > 0.05) but had a significant one in the markedly effective rate (P < 0.05); Group SM and Group S had a very significant difference in the markedly effective rate (P > 0.01) as well as a significant one in the total effective rate (P < 0.05). It was believed that SM could produce a marked therapeutic effect on CSA and had an advantage over other therapies, being one of the rational therapies for CSA.
出处
《中医正骨》
2003年第11期7-8,共2页
The Journal of Traditional Chinese Orthopedics and Traumatology
关键词
椎动脉型颈椎病
治疗
小针刀
旋牵手法
针刺疗法
CSA
临床资料
cervical spondylotic vertebral arteriopathy/treatment, scalpel therapy, rotating-pulling manipulations, acupuncture therapy, clinical study
