| Objective: To evaluate the clinical efficacy of myofascial-release needling therapy for Nonspecific low back pain,and to provide a new guidance of acupoint selection a nd acu-puncture manipulation.Methods:Methods: 46 patients with nonspecific low back pain were randomly divided into treatment group and control group,23 cases in each group.In the Lijin group(treatment group),acupuncture points were selected as follows: Baohuang,Zhibian,1 inch above Chengfu,Daheng,Weidao,Shenshu,Dachangshu,Qihaishu,Huangmen,Zhishi,Yaoyan.After entering the needle,the needle was pricked obliquely toward the focus area,and the pressing hand touched gently in the running direction of the needle beside the acupuncture point.Muscle twitch was often seen or the pressing hand felt muscle tremor,and then the needle was retreated slightly in the same direction until there was no muscle twitch,The acupuncture group(control group)was treated with traditional acupuncture method,and the main acupuncture points were selected as follows: Dachangshu,Qihaishu,Shenshu,Weizhong and Ashi,According to the syndrome,the acupoints were modified.After the needle was inserted,the needle was retained for 30 minutes,5 times a week for 3 weeks.Both groups were given rehabilitation training guidance.The clinical efficacy of the two treatment methods was evaluated by comparing the visual pain simulation score after one treatment,visual pain simulation score and disability index scale score at 1 week,the end of treatment,1month and 3 months after treatment.Result: 1.Visual Analogue Scale score: Treatment group: before treatment: 5.96 ± 1.718,after treatment: 2.96 ± 1.581;after treatment: 2.26 ± 1.096,at the end of treatment: 1.30 ±1.295;after treatment: 1.13 ± 1.180,after treatment: 1.22 ± 1.166;control group: before treatment: 6.04 ± 1.609,after treatment: 2.96 ± 2.078;after treatment: 2.87 ± 1.890,at the end of treatment: 1.83 ± 1.586;after treatment: 1 month follow-up The follow-up of 3 months after treatment was 2.09 ± 1.276.After treatment,the VAS scores of the two groups were lower than before treatment,the difference was statistically significant(P < 0.01).In the maintenance of curative effect,the difference between the two groups was statistically significant(P < 0.05).2.Oswestry Dability Index scale score :Treatment group: before treatment: 18.13 ±6.040,after 1 week of treatment: 7.61 ± 2.808,at the end of treatment: 3.96 ± 2.531;after 1month of treatment: 3.39 ± 3.187,after 3 months of treatment: 3.43 ± 3.188;control group:before treatment: 18.30 ± 5.217,after 1 week of treatment: 10.13 ± 3.794,at the end of treatment: 5.96 ± 3.404;after 1 month of treatment: 5.35 ± 3.352,after 3 months of treatment:5.48 ± 3.396.The ODI total score of the two groups after treatment was lower than that before treatment,and the curative effect could be maintained for 3 months,the difference was statistically significant(P < 0.01).After treatment and follow-up,the ODI score of the Lijin group was lower than that of the control group,the difference was statistically significant(P <0.05).3.Efficacy evaluation:Treatment group: cured: 4 cases;markedly effective: 16 cases;improved: 2 cases;invalid: 1 case.Control group: Cure: 1 case;markedly effective: 14 cases;improved: 6 cases;invalid: 2 cases.The effective rate and total effective rate of the treatment group were higher than those of the control group(P < 0.05)Conclusion: 1.In terms of pain:There was no significant difference in pain improvement between the treatment group and the control group.The long-term efficacy of the treatment group was better than that of the control group.2.In terms of waist function:The improvement of lumbar function and long-term effect in the treatment group were better than those in the control group... |
