Clinical Efficacy Compairson And Observation Of Treating Primary Insomnia With Acupuncture’s "Calming The Heart And Tranquilizing The Mind" And The Conventional Prescription

Objective: This research observes the efficacy of "calming the heart and tranquilizingthe mind" acupuncture prescription of the adviser’s empirical insomnia clinical treatmentacupoints in order to provide a more convenient, secure, effective, method with non-toxicside effects, compared with conventional treatment.Methods:60patients of primary insomnia who are conformed to subsumptive criteriaare randomly divided into treatment group and control group. The treatment group istreated with acupuncture of "calming the heart and tranquilizing the mind" prescription(xinshu, shenmen, shenting, shenfu, zusanli, sanyinjiao); the control group with theconventional acupuncture one (yintang, sishencong, anmian, shenmen, zhaohai, shenmai).The treatment period of both groups lasts for4weeks. The two groups of patients areobserved before and after treatment for the Pittsburgh sleeping quality index and theinsomnia clinical efficacy score changes.Results: Statistics analysis shows that compared with pre-treatment, the treatmentgroup’s sleeping quality, sleeping latency, sleeping time, sleeping efficiency, hypnoticmedication, and daytime dysfunction, Pittsburgh sleeping quality total decrease; and theremarkable differences have statistical significance (P<0.01); while, the sleeping disordershave no significant difference (P>0.05) from pre-treatment. The control group’s sleepingquality, sleeping latency, sleeping time, sleeping dysfunctions, sleeping efficiency,hypnotic medication and Pittsburgh sleeping quality total are lower than those ofpre-treatment, which has statistical significance (P<0.05or P<0.01); but the daytimedysfunction score’s difference from pre-treatment has no statistical significance (P>0.05).After treatment, the treatment group’s sleeping time, sleeping disorders, hypnotic drugs, daytime dysfunction, and Pittsburgh sleeping quality scores are lower than the controlgroup’s; and the differences are significant, which has statistical significance (P<0.05);while, compared with the control group after treatment, the sleeping quality, sleepinglatency, sleeping efficiency have no significant difference (P>0.05). The rank sum testP>0.05proves that the differences between the two groups of patients’ insomnia efficacystandards have no statistical significance. However, the treatment group’s clinical fullrecovery percentage, conspicuous efficacy percentage and total efficacy percentage arehigher than those of the control group, that is, the efficacies of the treatment group aresuperior than those of the control group.Conclusion: The study result shows that the treatments of both the treatment groupand the control group can improve the insomnia patients’ subjective sleeping quality,sleeping latency and sleeping efficiency; and there are no significant differences betweenthe two groups. But the sleeping time, sleeping disorders, hypnotic drugs, daytimedysfunction, and Pittsburgh sleeping quality total of the treatment group are higher thanthose of the control group. In general, the efficacies of the two groups are not muchdifferent, but that of the treatment group is likely above the control group’s.