Clinical Observation On Treatment Of Cervicogenic Headache By Traction And Bonesetting Manlpulation Plus Electro-Acupuncture

ObjectiveThe primary purpose of this study is to observe and compare the curative effect of cervical headache patients pulling and bonesetting manipulation plus electro-acupuncture and traditional traction plus electro-acupuncture through clinical randomized controlled trial,to make objective application data for cervical headache patients pulling and bonesetting manipulation plus electro-acupuncture,and analyze its effectiveness and safety,to provide reference for clinical treatment of cervical headache patients,to provide a new way of treatment and diagnosis.MethodThere were 86 patients with cervical headache were selected according to the diagnostic criteria,who were divided into treatment group and control group according to the principle of simple random and parallel control,43 cases in each group.The treatment group was treated with pulling and bonesetting manipulation plus electro-acupuncture,while the control group was treated with traditional traction and electro-acupuncture.The treatment duration was once a day,five days in a row as a course of treatment.There were two courses of treatment in total,two days of rest between each course(every Saturday,Sunday off).The clinical efficacy,the visual analogue score(VAS),the stiffness of the head and neck and the degree of activity of the cervical spine(ROM)and headache score(according to the evaluation of headache degree)were compared between the two groups before and after treatment.After treatment,an overall curative effect evaluation was conducted.The statistical software was used to verify whether the result was statistically significant.ResultOf the 86 patients met the inclusion criteria,86 actually completed cases,and no patients were excluded,dropped or stopped.(1)There was a significant difference between the two groups after and before treatment(P<0.01),indicating that the two groups were effective either.After two courses of treatment,the VAS score of the treatment group was better than the control group,indicating that the treatment group was better than the control group in improving pain.There was a significant difference between the two groups by Mann-Witney test(P<0.01).(2)The effect of the two groups on the stiffness of head and neck and ROM:there was a significant difference between the two groups after and before treatment(P<0.01),indicating that the two groups were effective either.After two courses of treatment,the ROM score of the treatment group was better than the control group,indicating that the treatment group was better than the control group in improving the stiffness of the head and neck and the activity of the cervical spine.There was a significant difference between the two groups by Mann-Witney test(P<0.01).(3)The effect of the two groups on headache score:there was a significant difference between the two groups after and before treatment(P<0.01),indicating that the two groups were effective either.After two courses of treatment,the headache score of the treatment group was better than the control group,indicating that the treatment group was better than the control group in improving pain.There was a significant difference between the two groups by two independent sample t-test(P<0.01)(4)The overall efficacy evaluation of the patients in the two groups:43 patients in the treatment group,the total effective rate is 93.02%,including 1 case of clinical cure(2.33%),20 cases of effective(46.51%),19 cases of effective(44.19%),3 cases of ineffective(6.98%);43 patients in the control group,the total effective rate is 86.04%,the total effective rate is 86.04%including 0 cases of clinical cure(0%),4 cases of effective(9.30%),33 cases of effective(76.74%),6 cases of ineffective(13.95%).There was a significant difference between the two groups in the composition ratio of clinical efficacy,indicating that the clinical efficacy of the treatment group was significantly better than that of the control group,and there was no significant difference in the total effective rate between the two groups.ConclusionThe results showed that both bone setting combined with pulling and bonesetting manlpulation plus electro-acupuncture and traditional traction combined with electro-acupuncture could effectively improve the symptoms of cervical headache,but the effect of pulling and bonesetting manlpulation electro-acupuncture is more effective,At the same time,it could be concluded that cervical headache is closely related to cervical facet joint disorder,cervical degenerative disease,and cervical muscle tension.After years of clinical practice,it is safe and reliable,which is worthy of vigorous promotion in clinical practice.