电针配合穴位注射用于神经根型颈椎病的临床研究

Clinical research on cervical spondylotic radiculopathy treated by electroacupuncture incorporate with acupuncture point injection

目的观察电针配合穴位注射治疗神经根型颈椎病的临床疗效。方法收集2011年2月至2012年11月程家桥社区卫生服务中心及社区站点门诊患者103例，采用函数RAND产生随机数及相应随机编号将患者随机分为三组，电针组34例采用电针治疗，穴位注射组34例采用穴位注射治疗，观察组35例采用电针配合牵引治疗，治疗结束后比较3组问疗效差异。结果①临床疗效比较：观察组总有效率为91．4％（32／35），电针组总有效率为73．5％（24／34），穴位注射组总有效率为70．6％（25／34），观察组总有效率与电针组、穴位注射组比较差异均有统计学意义（z=1．721，P〈0．05），电针组与穴位注射组比较差异无统计学意义（Z=2．473，P〉0．05）。②NDI评分比较：观察组、电针组、穴位注射组NDI评分[治疗前分别为（12．32±5．03）分、（12．96±6．10）分、（12．79±5．07）分，治疗后分别为（7．40±4．12）分、（6．08±3．60）分、（6．08±3．60）分]与同组治疗前比较，差异均有统计学意义（P均〈0．05），观察组治疗后疗效优于电针组和穴位注射组（P均〈0．05）。③症状体征疗效比较：治疗结束后，观察组在颈臂疼痛、臂手麻木、椎间孔挤压试验方面的改善，与电针组、穴位注射组比较，差异有统计学意义（z值分别为2．603、2．862、2．307，P〈0．05）；三组间在颈部功能活动、颈椎病变节段压痛方面比较，差异无统计学意义（z值分别为1．414、1．572，P〉0．05）。结论电针配合穴位注射治疗神经根型颈椎病疗效优于单纯电针及单纯穴位注射治疗。

Objective To investigate the clinical efficacy of electroacupuncture incorporate with acupuncture point injection in treating cervical spondylotic radiculopathy. Methods 103 cases from Chen Jia Qiao Community Health Service Centre and other community centers during February 2011 to November 2012 were collected and randomly allocated into three group： a electroacupuncture group of 34 cases; an acupuncture point injection of another 34 cases and an observation group of 35 cases treated with electroacupuncture which incorporated with traction therapy. After the treatment, the therapeutic effects among three groups were compared. Results ① clinical efficacy comparing： total efficacy rate of observation group was 91.4% （32/35）, the electroacupuncture group was 73.5% （24/34）, the group treated with acupuncture point injection was 70.6% （25/34）. There were statistically significant differences between the observation group and the other two groups （Z= 1.721, P〈0.05）, while there＇s no statistically significant of comparison between the group treated with electroacupuncture and the group treated with acupuncture point injection （Z=2.473, P〉0.05）. ②NDI score comparing： NDI score of these three groups before and after treatment. Before treatment, the score of observation group was （12.32±5.03） ; the electroacupuncture group was （12.96±6.10） ; the acupuncture point injection group was （12.79±5.07）, after treatment, the separate sore was （7.40±4.12）, （6.08±3.60） and （6.08±3.60） sequentially. There were statistically significant differences of NDI score of the three groups before and after treatment （P〈0.05）. After treatment, the efficacy of observation group was better than the group treated with electroacupuncture and the group treated with acupuncture point injection（P〈0.05）. ③ signs or symptoms comparing： After treatment, there were statistically significant differences between the observation group and the other two groups on the aspect of relieving pain of neck and arm, numbness of arm and hand, and alleviating soreness when doing spurling test on cervical intervertebral foramen （Z-score is 2.603, 2.862, 2.307, P〈0.05）. There＇s no statistically significant of comparison among three groups on the aspects of neck functional activities and segmental tenderness of cervical spondylosis （Z-score is 1.414, 1.572, P〉0.05）. Conclusion In treating cervical spondylotic radiculopathy, the total efficacy rate of electroacupuncture incorporate with acupuncture point injection was higher than only treat with electroacupuncture or acupuncture point injection.