电针委中穴缓解腰背肌疲劳的表面肌电研究

A study on mitigating low back muscle fatigue with electroacupuncture at accupoint of Weizhong by surface electromyography

目的:通过表面肌电探讨电针委中穴对腰背肌疲劳的缓解效应,为电针治疗慢性腰痛寻找实验依据。方法:30例健康大学生,测试前通过视频资料熟悉测试过程,前后进行3组测试(分别间隔1周),每组测试含2次腰背肌耐力测试。第一组测试(空白对照组):先进行腰背肌耐力测试,俯卧位休息5min,再进行第二次腰背肌耐力测试;1周后,进行第二组测试(电针委中组):先进行腰背肌耐力测试,俯卧位电针双侧委中穴5min,取针后再进行第二次腰背肌耐力测试;再1周后,进行第三组测试(电针假委中组):先进行腰背肌耐力测试,俯卧位电针双侧腘横纹中股二头肌肌腱内侧5min,取针后再进行第二次腰背肌耐力测试。间隔1周内,嘱受试者维持日常作息,不进行剧烈活动,排除第二组、第三组测试时腰背肌出现疲劳、疼痛等不适者(本研究无剔除、脱落样本),以避免前后两组测试间相互影响。测试由4人同步进行,分别操作测试床、关节活动度尺、针刺与电针仪和表面肌电图仪。观察三种不同干预下腰背肌耐力测试维持时间及双侧腰竖脊肌、多裂肌的表面肌电(sEMG)指标——平均功率频率(MPF)。结果:三种干预方式下腰背肌耐力测试维持时间比较:第一次测试较第二次测试差异有显著性(P<0.05);第二次测试电针委中组与空白对照组、电针假委中组比较,差异有显著性(P<0.05);空白对照组与电针假委中组比较,第二次测试差异没有显著性(P>0.05)。三种干预方式下双侧腰竖脊肌和多裂肌MPF比较:第二次测试较第一次测试差异有显著性(P<0.05);电针委中组与空白对照组、电针假委中组比较,第二次测试差异有显著性(P<0.05);空白对照组与电针假委中组比较,第二次测试差异没有显著性(P>0.05)。结论:电针委中穴可有效缓解双侧腰竖脊肌和多裂肌疲劳。

Objective： We mitigate low back muscle fatigue with electroacupuncture （EA） at the bilateral acupoints of Weizhong （BL40） in order to determine the efficacy of EA for chronic low back pain by surface electromyography （sEMG）. Method： Totally 30 healthy college students participated in low back muscle endurance test （static endurance weight load test）. Before the test, all 30 students got previews of the test procedures by watching video.There were three tests（one-week interval respectively） with different interventions, each test included 2 times of low back muscle endurance test. Control group （30 students） received low back muscle endurance test first, then faced down on bed and took rest for 5 minutes, then repeated the test with no intervention. One week later, EA BL40 group （same 30 students） received low back muscle endurance test first, then faced down on bed with EA at the bilateral BL40 for 5 minutes as an intervention, then repeated the test. During each one-week interval, the subjects were informed to keep their daily routine and avoid intense activities. Subjects who suffered form low back muscles＇ fatigue or pain in the second and third tests would be excluded（no withdraw in our test） in order to remove the interaction between tests. Four experimenters worked together simultaneously for the following four parts： operation of the test couch, the ROM ruler, the acupuncture device and the sEMG device. The duration of endurance test and the sEMG indicator （mean power frequency, MPF） were ob- served on bilateral lumber erector spinae and the multifidus muscle with three different interventions. Result： ①The comparison among the three different kinds of intervention for the duration of endurance test： the second test was significantly longer than the first test （P〈0.05）; EA BL40 group was significantly longer than EA non-BL40 group and control group （P〈0.05）; there was no significant difference between control group and EA non-BL40 group （P〉0.05）.②The comparison among the three different kinds of intervention of MPF： the second test was significantly higher than the first test （P〈0.05）; EA BL40 group was significantly higher than EA non-BL40 group and control group （P〈0.05）; there was no significant difference between control group and EA non-BL40 group （P〉0.05）. Conclusion： EA at the bilateral BL40 does facilitate releasing the fatigue of bilateral lumber erector spinae and the multifidus muscle effectively