颗粒复位手法中的体位限制对治疗后半规管良性发作性位置性眩晕的作用

The Comparison of Particle Repositioning Maneuver and Postural Restriction Therapy for Posterior Semicircular Canal Benign Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo

目的：评价颗粒复位手法(PRM)中的体位限制在治疗后半规管良性发作性位置性眩晕(BPPV)中的作用。方法：将后半规管 BPPV 患者随机分成2组，复位组33例给予 PRM 治疗加体位限制；对照组32例仅给予体位限制治疗。结果：治疗后第4天复位组和 对照组的成功率分别为75． 8%(25/33) 和15． 6%(5/32) ，两者差异显著(x^2=21． 28，P＜0． 005) ；治疗后第7天两者的成功率分别为 87． 9%(29/33) 和28． 1%(9/32) ，具有显著差异(x^2=21． 49，P＜0． 005) 。结论：PRM 治疗效果明显优于体位限制治疗，凡后半规管 BPPV 诊断明确者均应给予 PRM 治疗。

Objective：. To assess the effects of particle repositioning rnaneuver（PRM） and postural restriction therapy on posterior semicircular canal benign paroxysmal positional vertigo（BPPV）. Methods： Patients with posterior semicircular canal BPPV were randomly divided into 2 groups; repositioning group（n = 33） and control group（n = 32）. Patients in repositioning group were received PRM and postural restriction therapy, patients in control group were only received postuml restriction therapy. Results.. The success rates in repositioning group and control group were 75. 8%（25/33） and 15. 6%（5/32）, respectively 4 days after theroply, there was significant difference between the two groups（X^2 = 21.28, P〈0. 005）. The two rates were 87. 9% （29/33） and 28.1 % （9/32）, respectively 7 days after therapy the difference was also significant（X^2 = 21.49, P〈0. 005）. Conclusion： The therapy effect of PRM was superior to postural striction, and all patients should be treated by PRM when the diagnosis of posterior semicircular canal BPPV was macle.