电针结合推拿与冲击波疗法对髌下脂肪垫损伤的治疗比较

The comparison of acupuncture and shock wave therapeutics for the injury of infrapatellar fat pad

目的通过对目前运动医学领域中治疗髌下脂肪垫损伤时最常用两种方法的比较,即电针结合推拿疗法与冲击波疗法的比较,来寻求两者之中更科学、更有效的方法。方法选取典型的髌下脂肪垫损伤运动员60人,随机分为A组、B组:即电针结合推拿治疗组、冲击波治疗组,每组30人,对各组采取相应的治疗措施,治疗时间均为20 d。电针结合推拿组每天治疗1次,每次治疗时间为20 min,总时长为两个疗程(20 d)。冲击波治疗组间隔4 d进行1次治疗,1个疗程(20 d)共计5次。采用疼痛视觉模拟量表(VAS)及临床总有效率作为疗效评价指标,观察治疗结束后运动员伤病的恢复情况,并利用统计软件SPSS17.0对实验数据做科学分析,最后经对比找出一种更为有效的治疗手段。结果 1疗程结束后电针结合推拿组VAS评分低于冲击波组,两组比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);2两组在疗程结束后临床治愈率比较:电针结合推拿组为90%;冲击波组为40%;差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。结论电针结合推拿疗法与冲击波疗法相比,前者对于运动员髌下脂肪垫损伤的治疗效果更为显著。

[Objective ] To compare the acupuncture and shock wave therapeutics for the injury of infrapatellar fat pad in the sports medicine, and find the more scientific methods. [ Methods ] 90 athletes who sicken for the injury of infrapatellar fat pad were divided into 3 groups at random. They are Group A （the control group）, Group B （acupuncture group） and Group C （shock wave therapeutics） and 30 athletes each group. Each group received cure for 20 days once daily, conditions were and observed analyzed by scientific software and the more scientific and ef- fective therapeutics were found finally. [Results] （1）The situation of Group B： The excellent rate is 90%; the im- provement rate is 10%; no effect 0 case; The general effective rate is 100%. The situation of Group C： The excellent rate is 60%; the improvement rate is 40% ; no effect 0 case; The general effective rate is 100%; （2）The comparison of Group B and C ： Group B is better than Group C obviously. [Conclusions] The comparison of acupuncture and shock wave therapeutics for the injury of infrapatellar fat pad is that the former is better than the latter.