ABSTRACT Objective To compare the efficacies on scapulohumeral periarthritis between superficial needling therapy （SN） and warm needling method. Methods Sixty-six cases were randomized into two groups, 33 cases in e...ABSTRACT Objective To compare the efficacies on scapulohumeral periarthritis between superficial needling therapy （SN） and warm needling method. Methods Sixty-six cases were randomized into two groups, 33 cases in each one. In SN group, Superficial needling therapy was adopted. In warm needling group, warm acupuncture was applied to Jianyu （肩髃 LI 15）, Tianzong（天宗 SI 11） , Ashi, etc. Functional exercise was assisted in both groups. After 2 courses of treatment, it was to assess the efficacy, relevant pain scale on movement （VAS）, decrease range of motion of shoulder joint （ROM） and comprehensive score in two groups. Results In SN group, the basic curative rate was 27.3 % and total effective rate was 97.0 %. In warm needling group, the basic curative rate was 6. 1% and total effective rate was 75.8%. The efficacy in SN group was superior to that in warm needling group （P〈0.05）. The improvements of VAS, ROM and comprehensive score in SN group were all superior significantly to those in warm needling group （P〈0. 001）. Conclusion Superficial needling therapy achieves quite significant efficacy on scapulohumeral periarthritis and is convenient in operation and good in adherence.展开更多
文摘ABSTRACT Objective To compare the efficacies on scapulohumeral periarthritis between superficial needling therapy （SN） and warm needling method. Methods Sixty-six cases were randomized into two groups, 33 cases in each one. In SN group, Superficial needling therapy was adopted. In warm needling group, warm acupuncture was applied to Jianyu （肩髃 LI 15）, Tianzong（天宗 SI 11） , Ashi, etc. Functional exercise was assisted in both groups. After 2 courses of treatment, it was to assess the efficacy, relevant pain scale on movement （VAS）, decrease range of motion of shoulder joint （ROM） and comprehensive score in two groups. Results In SN group, the basic curative rate was 27.3 % and total effective rate was 97.0 %. In warm needling group, the basic curative rate was 6. 1% and total effective rate was 75.8%. The efficacy in SN group was superior to that in warm needling group （P〈0.05）. The improvements of VAS, ROM and comprehensive score in SN group were all superior significantly to those in warm needling group （P〈0. 001）. Conclusion Superficial needling therapy achieves quite significant efficacy on scapulohumeral periarthritis and is convenient in operation and good in adherence.
