Objective: To observe the clinical effect of tuina combined with auricular point sticking on cervical radiculopathy and evaluate in health economics. Methods: Using randomized single-blind controlled clinical design, ...Objective: To observe the clinical effect of tuina combined with auricular point sticking on cervical radiculopathy and evaluate in health economics. Methods: Using randomized single-blind controlled clinical design, a total of 72 cases with cervical radiculopathy were randomly allocated into an observation group or a control group by the ratio of 1:1, 36 in each group. Cases in the observation group were treated with tuina combined with auricular point sticking, whereas cases in the control group were treated with tuina alone. Then the clinical effects in the two groups were observed and the cost of health economics was evaluated. Results: The drop-out, recovery, improvement and failure cases, recovery rate and total effective rate in the observation group were 1, 15, 20, 0, 42.9% and 100% respectively, versus 2, 6, 23, 5, 17.6% and 85.3% in the control group, showing significant differences in recovery rate and total effective rate(P<0.05). As for health economics, the cost-effect in the observation group was better than that in the control group. Conclusion: Compared with tuina alone, tuina combined with auricular point sticking can obtain better effect and lower cost in health economics for cervical radiculopathy.展开更多
基金supported by Project of Longhua Hospital, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine (No. 2013YM09)the Ding’s Tuina Project, Three-year Plan of Shanghai Traditional Chinese Medicine Development (Inheritance Project for Shanghai Schools of Traditional Chinese Medicine) (No. ZYSNXD-CC- HPGC-JD-011)
文摘Objective: To observe the clinical effect of tuina combined with auricular point sticking on cervical radiculopathy and evaluate in health economics. Methods: Using randomized single-blind controlled clinical design, a total of 72 cases with cervical radiculopathy were randomly allocated into an observation group or a control group by the ratio of 1:1, 36 in each group. Cases in the observation group were treated with tuina combined with auricular point sticking, whereas cases in the control group were treated with tuina alone. Then the clinical effects in the two groups were observed and the cost of health economics was evaluated. Results: The drop-out, recovery, improvement and failure cases, recovery rate and total effective rate in the observation group were 1, 15, 20, 0, 42.9% and 100% respectively, versus 2, 6, 23, 5, 17.6% and 85.3% in the control group, showing significant differences in recovery rate and total effective rate(P<0.05). As for health economics, the cost-effect in the observation group was better than that in the control group. Conclusion: Compared with tuina alone, tuina combined with auricular point sticking can obtain better effect and lower cost in health economics for cervical radiculopathy.
