| Objective:The research discusses the relation between the quantity and the clinical efficacy of thermo-sensitive point moxibustion’ by observing the clinical efficacy of different quantity of moxibustion on treating knee osteoarthritis.Methods:40patients with knee osteoarthritis were randomly divided into two groups’ the20patients treated with the sensitiveness-eliminated saturated quantity of thermo-sensitive points moxibustion therapy’ and the other20patients in control group is treated with traditional quantity of thermo-sensitive points moxibustion therapy.The methods respectively are:1. The treatment group of sensitiveness-eliminated saturated quantity:the patients are treated with thermo-sensitive points moxibustion therapy only on the most thermo-sensitive point until the transmitting feeling of thermo-sensitive points is gone max time is sixty minutes and the min time is thirty minutes.2. The control group of traditional quantity:the patients are treated with thermo-sensitive point moxibustion therapy only on the most thermo-sensitive point for fifteen minutes. The courses of treatment of the two groups are both two months’ and the follow-up time is six months after the courses of treatment. Before and after treatments of these two groups’symptoms are compared and observed by Pain VAS score points’ and the clinical efficacy is evaluated.Results:1. In the general clinical data ’ they are comparable in the patients of the two groups’ but there are no statistically significant difference in statistic (P>0.05).2. The total efficiency of the clinical efficacy of the group treated with the sensitiveness-eliminated saturated quantity is85%, while the total efficiency of that of the group treated with traditional quantity is60%, χ2=9.082, P<0.05. The clinical efficacy of the group treated with the sensitiveness-eliminated saturated quantity is superior to that of the group treated with traditional quantity.3. Clinical symptoms scale scores of both groups were compared’ and with the course of progress the symptoms of both groups have been effectively alleviated. The symptom improvement of thermo-sensitive moxibustion treatment group was better than the traditional moxibustion group (Ztreatment group=-2.001, P<0.05; Z control group=-2.456, P<0.05)’ both when the treatment was completed and after six months. After six months’ the results showed that the thermo-sensitive treatment group was improved and also there was no side effect for long term treatment (P>0.05)’ while symptoms of the traditional moxibustion group after treatment were not improved as much as thermo-sensitive group and had relapse (P<0.05).4. By pain visual analog scale scores (VAS) of the two groups, the treatment group and the control group both can effectively relieve patients’pain. The analgesic effect of thermo-sensitive moxibustion treatment group was better than the traditional moxibustion group (Z treatment group=-3.070, P<0.05; Zcontrol group=-2.795, P<0.05) both when the treatment was completed and after six months. Six month follow-up results after the comparison’ the treatment group analgesic effect of long-term efficacy is extremely stable (P>0.05)’ while the patients’pain of the control group after the end of six months there are different degree of recurrence (P<0.05).5. Treating knee osteoarthritis with thermo-sensitive point moxibustion therapy with adequate quantity of moxibustion can reduce the patients’pain and the clinical symptoms. Besides’ its curative effect is superior to the group of traditional quantity of moxibustion therapy’ and it has stable curative effect in long term. Thus’ it can be extended as a clinical treatment and deeply researched.Conclusion:1. Treatment of thermo-sensitive point moxibustion can treat knee osteoarthritis effectively in clinic.2. The quantity of thermo-sensitive point moxibustion therapy on treating knee osteoarthritis is superior to the quantity of traditional moxibustion therapy.3. While the patients apply to thermo-sensitive point moxibustion therapy’ adequate quantity of moxibustion improves the clinic efficacy. |