The Clinical Evaluation Of Multi-Needle Therapy On Migraine Without Aura By Sharphook Needle And Filiform Needle

Objective: To observe the clinical efficacy of frontal acupuncture combined with acupuncture combined therapy in the treatment of migraine without aura,and to evaluate the efficacy of this therapy.Methods: A total of 57 patients with migraine without aura and 57 patients with migraine without aura were enrolled in the Department of Acupuncture and Moxibustion of the Third Hospital of Shanxi Traditional Chinese Medical University and Linshu People’s Hospital.According to the ratio of 1:1:1,they were randomly divided into acupuncture group,frontal needle group,and comprehensive group(one group in each of the last three groups)with 18 cases in each group.Before the three groups were treated,magnetic round needles were used to round the head.Yang Jing,neck ridge beat,20 minutes each time,three times a week,comprehensive group: use front hook needle to cut Baihui,head dimension(double),Xuanlu(double),wind pool(double),Yintang,every other day Acupuncture was performed on the same acupuncture points,once a week for one round of needle and four millimeters of needle treatment,three weeks for a course of treatment;acupuncture group: acupoints and comprehensive group,5 times a week,three weeks for a course of treatment;Group: Acupoints are consistent with the comprehensive group,once a week,and three weeks as a course of treatment.The clinical efficacy of the three groups was assessed by observing the decrease in the pain level,number of attacks,duration,concomitant symptoms,and VAS scores of patients with and without migraine before and after treatment,and statistically follow-up after one month from the end of treatment.And compare the recurrence rate of each group,and then compare the prognosis of the three groups.Results: 1.The total scores of the clinical symptoms before and after the treatment in the integrated group,the acupuncture group and the frontal needle group were all significantly improved(P<0.01),indicating that the three groups of treatment produced various indicators.Significant influence2.There was a significant difference in the three groups of treatment measures in the reduction of pain scores for migraine without miseries(2=20.212,p<0.001),and after multiple comparisons,there was a significant difference between the integrated group and the frontal needle group.(p < 0.001),there was a significant difference between the needle group and the comprehensive group(p<0.001).There was no significant difference between the needle group and the frontal needle group(p=0.33),indicating that the integrated group was significantly better than the other two groups in terms of pain relief.The three groups of treatment methods had significant differences in the improvement of migraine attack frequency score(2 = 8.958,p = 0.011,),and the multiple groups were further found in the comprehensive group.There was a significant difference between the frontal needle group and the needle group(p<0.001).There was a significant difference between the needle group and the comprehensive group(p<0.001).There was no significant difference between the needle group and the frontal needle group(p=0.533),indicating that the comprehensive group was improve The number of migraine attacks was superior to the other two groups.There was no significant difference between the migraine group and the frontal needle group.4.There was no significant difference in the duration score and the decrease of the concomitant symptom scores between the three groups of migraine without migraine after treatment.Differences(p>0.05)showed that the three groups were effective in reducing the time of onset of migraine without aura,reducing the accompanying symptoms,and there was no difference between the groups in this effect;5.When assessing the initial migraine pain level,the observation and synthesis The VAS scores of the group,the needle group,and the frontal needle group(p > 0.05)were not significantly different between the groups.The VAS scores after treatment were 3.68±1.67,3.78±2.43,and 3.25±1.21,respectively.The needle group had a better effect on the VAS score reduction than the frontal needle group.Conclusion: The comprehensive group,the acupuncture group,and the frontal acupuncture group have significant curative effects in the treatment of migraine without aura,all of which greatly improve the patient’s clinical symptoms and relieve the patient’s pain,but the comprehensive group is improving the patient.The number of episodes without migraine and the degree of pain were significantly better than those of the other two groups.There was no significant difference between the three groups in relieving the duration of migraine without aura and concomitant symptoms.However,they all had significant effects.In terms of effectiveness,the comprehensive group,Both the needle group and the frontal needle group had significant effects,but the recovery rate in the integrated group was significantly higher than that in the other two groups.In terms of safety,the comprehensive group was characterized by strong safety and no side effects;theintegrated group was found after one month’s follow-up.The recurrence rate of patients using frontal needle acupuncture combined with needle acupuncture therapy was significantly lower than that of the frontal needle group and the needle group.In summary,the frontal acupuncture combined with the acupuncture therapy was superior in efficacy and safety in the treatment of migraine without aura.No toxic side effects,it is worth promoting in clinical practice.