内热针治疗跖筋膜炎临床观察

Clinical Effect of Internal Heated Needle in Treatment of Plantar Fasciitis

目的观察内热针治疗跖筋膜炎的临床疗效。方法将56例跖筋膜炎患者随机分为两组,每组28例。治疗组采用内热针治疗,对照组采用封闭治疗。治疗前、治疗后2周和治疗后2个月,分别采用视觉模拟量表(visual analogue scale,VAS)评价患足疼痛程度,采用美国足踝外科协会踝-后足量表(American orthopaedic foot and ankle society-ankle hindfoot scale,AOFAS-AHS)评价患足综合功能。结果与治疗前比较,治疗后2周和治疗后2个月,两组VAS评分均显著降低(P<0.05),AOFAS-AHS评分均显著升高(P<0.05);治疗后2周,两组VAS和AOFAS-AHS评分比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);治疗后2个月,治疗组VAS评分显著低于对照组(P<0.05),AOFAS-AHS评分显著高于对照组(P<0.05)。结论内热针和封闭治疗跖筋膜炎均有较好的近期疗效,内热针的远期疗效优于封闭疗法。

Objective To investigate the clinical effect of internal heated needle in the treatment of plantar fasciitis. Methods A total of 56 patients with plantar fasciitis were randomly divided into treatment group and control group. The patients in the treatment group were given internal heated needle therapy, and those in the control group were given blocking therapy. Before treatment, after 2 weeks of treatment, and at 2 months after treatment, the Visual Analogue Scale （VAS） was used to evaluate the degree of foot pain, and the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society-Ankle-Hindfoot Scale （AOFAS-AHS） was used to assess foot function. Results After 2 weeks of treatment and at 2 months after treatment, both groups had a significant reduction in VAS score （P〈0.05） and a significant increase in AOFAS-AHS score （P〈0.05）. After 2 weeks of treatment, there were no significant differences between the two groups in VAS and AOFAS-AHS scores （P〉0.05）. At 2 months after treatment, the treatment group had a significantly lower VAS score and a significantly higher AOFAS-AHS score than the control group （P〈0.05）. Conclusion Both internal heated needle therapy and blocking therapy have a good short-term clinical effect in the treatment of plantar fasciitis, while internal heated needle therapy has a better long-term effect than blocking therapy.