耳穴压豆治疗前庭性偏头痛的临床研究

Clinical Research on Auricular Pressure in the Treatment of Vestibular Migraine

目的观察耳穴压豆治疗前庭性偏头痛与西医常规治疗的疗效对比,初步验证耳穴压豆治疗前庭性偏头痛的临床疗效及安全性,为治疗前庭性偏头痛提供新思路,指导临床实践。方法本研究采用随机数字表法将符合纳入标准和排除标准的70例前庭性偏头痛患者随机分为治疗组与对照组。治疗组35例,给予耳穴压豆治疗;对照组35例,给予口服甲磺酸倍他司汀片治疗。观察治疗前后中医证候量表评分变化、眩晕障碍量表评分变化和健康状况量表评分变化以评定其疗效及安全性。治疗后随访3个月,观察两组眩晕复发情况。结果 1)治疗组总有效率为75.76%,对照组总有效率为76.47%。两组间总有效率比较无统计学意义(P>0.05),说明治疗组和对照组的总有效率相似。2)治疗前后,治疗组在中医证候量表评分、眩晕障碍量表评分、健康状况量表评分及随访眩晕复发次数和持续时间均优于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P均<0.05)。结论耳穴压豆治疗前庭性偏头痛与口服甲磺酸倍他司汀片总疗效相似,但在改善中医证候量表评分、眩晕障碍量表评分、健康状况量表评分方面耳穴压豆治疗优于口服甲磺酸倍他司汀片,且能够减少眩晕复发次数、缩短眩晕复发持续时间,远期疗效较好,值得临床推广。

Objective To observe the curative effect of auricular p ressure and Western medicine in the treatment of vestibular mi-graine, to give preliminary validation clinical curative effect and security of the auricular pressure in treatment of vestibular migraine,and to provide a new way to treat vestibular migraine and guide the clinical practice. Methods This study applied method of random numbers table, 70 cases of vestibular migraine consistent with the inclusion criteria and exclusion criteria patients were randomly di-vided into treatment group and control group. 35 cases in the treatment group were given auricular pressure treatment. The control group of 35 cases was given oral betahistine mesilate tablets. Before and after treatment, TCM syndrome scale score changes, vertigo disorder scale score changes and health status rating scale of the two groups were used to assess the effect and safety. Following-up for 3 months after treatment, the dizziness relapse situation was observed. Results The total effective rate of the treatment group and the control group was 75.76% and 76.47%, respectively. The total effective rate between the two groups had no statistical significance（ P〉 0.05）, and the total effective rate between the treatment group and control group was similar. Before and after treatment, the TCM syndrome scale score changes, vertigo disorder scale score changes and health status rating scale were used to assess the effect and follow-up vertigo attack frequency and duration of the treatment group were better than those of the control group, and the differ-ence was statistically significant（P〈 0.05）. Conclusion The total curative effect of auricular pressure and oral betahistine mesylate tablets in the treatment of vestibular migraine was similar, but in terms of improving syndromes of auricular pressure treatment is bet-ter than that of betahistine mesilate tablets, it can reduce the recurrence of vertigo, shorten the duration of recurrent vertigo, the long-term curative effect is better, and is worthy of clinical promotion.