刺络放血拔罐治疗偏头痛发作期30例

Phlebotomy and Cupping in the Treatment of Venesection: Observation of 30 Cases

目的:观察刺络放血拔罐治疗偏头痛发作期的临床疗效。方法:将60例偏头痛患者随机分为刺络组和西药组,每组各30例。刺络组采用太阳穴及其附近体表络脉刺络放血拔罐,西药组采用双氯芬酸钠口服。治疗完成后,对治疗前后患者VAS评分、头痛次数、程度、持续时间、伴随症状、综合评分及不良反应等方面进行疗效评价。结果:单次治疗结束后,刺络组有效率为60%,西药组有效率为73.3%,经检验,两组在单次治疗有效率方面无显著差异(P>0.05);观察期结束后,组内治疗前后比较,在头痛发作次数、程度、持续时间、伴随症状评分及综合计分方面,差异均有显著性(P<0.01);治疗前后组间比较,在头痛发作次数、程度、持续时间、伴随症状评分及综合评分方面无显著差异(P>0.05);刺络组总有效率83.3%,西药组总有效率76.6%,经检验,两组在总有效率方面无显著差异(P>0.05)。结论:刺络放血拔罐与西药治疗发作期偏头痛均可获得满意疗效,两疗法效果相当,但刺络放血拔罐治疗不良反应发生率偏低。

Objective： To observe the clinical efficacy of venesection phlebotomy and cupping in the treatment of migraine during ictual time. Methods： 60 patients with migraine were randomly divided into two groups of venesection group（ VG） and western medicine group（ WG）,with 30 cases in each group. VG was pricked to bleed and then cup at the temple or the collaterals surrounded,and the medicine group was with oral diclofenac.After the treatment,evaluate the efficacy through the VAS scores,scores of headache frequency,intensity,time of duration and associated symptoms and comprehensive scores and adverse reactions. Results： After a single treatment,the efficiency of VG was 60% and WG was 73. 3%. By testing,the efficiency of two groups in a single treatment had no significant difference（ P 〉0. 05）; within two groups before and after treatment,the difference was significant（ P 〈0. 01） in the comparison of the scores of headache frequency,intensity,time of duration and associated symptoms＇ scores and comprehensive scores; between two groups before and after treatment,there was no significant difference（ P 〉0. 05） in the scores of headache frequency,intensity,time of duration and associated symptoms＇ scores and comprehensive scores; the overall response rate of VG was 83. 3% and WG was 76. 6%. By inspection,there was no significant difference（ P 〉0. 05） between two groups according to efficiency. Conclusion： Both VG and WG can obtain satisfactory results,and the effect of two treatments is equivalent,but VG has a low incidence of adverse reactions,which is better than WG.