Clinical Effect Observation Of Electroacupuncture In The Treatment Of Diarrhea-predominant Irritable Bowel Syndrome

Objective:In this study,a randomized controlled clinical study was conducted to compare the clinical efficacy of manual acupuncture(MA)and electroacupuncture(EA)in the treatment of diarrhea-type irritable bowel syndrome,and to evaluate the efficacy difference between EA and MA,so as to provide theoretical basis for the application and promotion of EA in the treatment of IBS-D.Methods:In this study,a total of 62 patients who met the diagnostic criteria and inclusion criteria were randomly divided into groups according to the ratio of 1:1 using the random number table method,namely,31 cases in the EA group(experimental group)and 31 cases in the MA group(control group).Five acupoints are selected: Tianshu,Zhongwan,Zusanli,Shangjuxu and Guan Yuan.The MA group was treated with conventional acupuncture,and the EA group was treated with electric stimulation on the basis of conventional acupuncture to de qi at acupoints.Bilateral Tianshu,ipsilateral Zusanli and Shangjuxu connecting EA,and the needle was left for 30 minutes.The two groups were treated 3 times a week for 6 weeks.The outcome measure were Irritable bowel Syndrome-Symptom Severity Score(IBS-SSS),Irritable Bowel Syndrome-Quality of Life questionnaire(IBS-QOL)and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale(HAMA).The outcome indicators of the two groups of patients were evaluated before the first treatment and after the end of the treatment period,and the clinical efficacy and safety of the two groups were observed,and the data were statistically analyzed with SPSS25.0.Results:1.The baseline to compare: Due to COVID-19,personal reasons of patients and other factors,1 patient in each of the EA group and the MA group dropped out,so the final data included 30 patients in the EA group and 30 patients in the MA group.There were no significant differences in gender,age(years),and disease duration(years)between the two groups(P>0.05),indicating comparability.2.IBS-SSS score: Before treatment,there were no statistical significance in the total score of IBS-SSS and the scores of each dimension between the two groups(P > 0.05),indicating comparability.Comparison within groups: After treatment,the IBS-SSS total score and the scores of dimension in two groups were significantly lower than those before treatment,with statistical significance(P < 0.01).Comparison between groups: After treatment,the total score of patients in the EA group was reduced to a better extent than that in the MA group,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).In terms of scoring on each dimension,the improvement degree of abdominal pain and abdominal distension in the EA group was better than MA group(P<0.05),but there were no significant differences between the EA group and the MA group in the improvement degree of abdominal pain days,defecation satisfaction,and life disturbance(P>0.05).IBS-QOL score: Before treatment,there were no significant difference between the two groups in IBS-QOL total score and the scores of each dimension(P > 0.05),indicating comparability.Comparison within groups: After treatment,IBS-QOL scores in both groups were significantly increased compared with before treatment,with statistical significance(P< 0.01).In terms of scoring on each dimension,except for sexual behavior(P>0.05),the scores of other dimensions were all higher than before treatment,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).Comparison between groups: After treatment,there was no significant difference in the improvement of the total score of IBS-QOL score and the scores of each dimension between the two groups(P>0.05).HAMA score: Before treatment,there was no statistically significant difference in HAMA score between the two groups(P > 0.05),indicating comparability.Comparison within groups: After treatment,HAMA scores in both group were significantly lower than before treatment(P < 0.01).Comparison between groups: After treatment,there was no significant difference in HAMA scale scores between the two groups(P>0.05).3.Safety evaluationDuring the study,there were no obvious adverse reactions in the two groups,and the safety was good.Among them,1 patient in the EA group experienced short-term abdominal and lower limb muscle soreness after 2 times of acupuncture during the treatment,which relieved spontaneously after rest.In the MA group,1 patient was sensitive to acupuncture due to personal physical reasons.After each treatment,the lower limbs felt soft and weak,which was completely relieved after rest,and no other obvious discomfort was observed.Conclusion:Both EA and MA in the treatment of IBS-D can significantly improve gastrointestinal symptoms such as abdominal pain and diarrhea,reduce the severity of symptoms,improve the quality of life of patients,and improve the state of anxiety.Moreover,EA is better than MA in the improvement of abdominal pain,abdominal distention,and the clinical treatment is safe and effective.