| ObjectiveTo explore the effect of six-character formula of fitness Qigong on patients with chronic low back pain of deficiency of liver and kidney,and to compare the intervention effect of sixcharacter formula and traditional core stabilization training on patients with chronic low back pain of deficiency of liver and kidney,so as to provide a new method for exercise rehabilitation of patients with chronic low back pain of deficiency of liver and kidney.MethodThe patients diagnosed as low back pain in the Massage Department of the first affiliated Hospital of Tianjin University of traditional Chinese Medicine from September 2018 to March 2019 have completed clinical treatment and discharged from hospital for 6 months.70 subjects who met the requirements were selected by inclusion and exclusion criteria.Using the random coding table generated by SPSS25.0 software,the subjects were randomly divided into experimental group(n = 35)and control group(n = 35).The test group was trained with Liuzijue exercise,while the control group was trained with traditional core stability training.Among them,the Liuzijue exercise method is integrated on the basis of promoting the Qigong Liuzijue exercise by the State Administration of Sports,and the specific principle of integration is based on the etiology and pathogenesis of patients with liver and kidney deficiency,on the basis of a complete set of six-character formula training.focus on the training of "xu" and "chui";the core stability training is "cat-camel style","supine hip bridge" and "bird-and-dog style".The experimental group and the traditional core stabilization training control group were intervened for 15 minutes twice a day,the total intervention time was 30 minutes,5 times a week,and the training lasted for 4 weeks.The subjects were evaluated and supervised by professionals before and after intervention.Through the curative effect index,the improvement effects of lumbar discomfort symptoms,lumbar muscle surface EMG,pain symptoms,dysfunction and quality of life in patients with chronic low back pain of liver and kidney deficiency were observed.ResultsA total of 70 subjects were enrolled in this trial,35 in the experimental group and 35 in the control group.There were 5 cases of exfoliation within the dry expectation,including 3 cases in the test group and 2 cases in the control group.A total of 65 subjects were collected from the final income data.there was no significant difference between the two groups in age,sex,course of disease,syndrome type,average amplitude of surface EMG,visual analog pain scale((VAS)),dysfunction index((ODI))and quality of life scale(SF-36)before intervention(P >0.05).No adverse events occurred in the course of the experiment.1.The total effective rate of the six-word training group was 90.63%,and that of the core stable training group was 72.73%.By comparison,it was found that the total effective rate of the six-word formula training group after intervention was higher than that of the core stable training group.There was a statistical difference between the two groups(P<0.05).2.Comparison of the average amplitude of surface EMG of the test muscle group: compared within the group,the average EMG amplitude of the test group(lumbosacral vertical spine muscle,multifida muscle,gluteus medius muscle)after intervention was higher than that before intervention,and the difference was statistically significant(P <0.05).After intervention,the average EMG amplitudes of the tested muscles(lumbosacral vertical spine muscle,multifida muscle and gluteus medius muscle)in the test group were compared between the two groups.The effect of improving EMG in the test group was more significant than that in the control group(P<0.05).3.Comparison of VAS score data: compared between groups,the VAS score of the two groups after intervention was compared,the score of the experimental group was lower than that of the control group,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).The intervention effect of the six-word key group was better than that of the core training group.The VAS scores of the two groups after intervention were lower than those before intervention,and there was significant difference between the two groups(P<0.05).4.Comparison of ODI: after intervention,the ODI scores of the two groups were lower than those before intervention(P<0.05),and there was significant difference between the two groups(P<0.05).Comparison between the two groups: after intervention,the ODI score of the test group was lower than that of the control group,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).The improvement of ODI score of the test group was significantly stronger than that of the control group.5.Comparison of quality of life scale(SF-36).5.1 Compared with the physiological function(PF): group,the score of the experimental group changed significantly before and after the intervention,and the score after the intervention was higher than that before the intervention(P<0.05),while the score of the control group did not change before and after the intervention.There was no significant difference in the score after intervention between the two groups(P>0.05).In terms of improving physiological function,there was no significant difference between the experimental group and the control group.5.2 Physiological function(RP): was compared between the two groups.From the average value,the score of the test group after intervention was higher than that before intervention,and the difference was statistically significant(P <0.05),but there was no significant difference before and after intervention in the control group(P>0.05).After intervention,there was no significant difference between the experimental group and the control group in the improvement of physiological function(RP)(P>0.05).There was no significant difference in the improvement effect of physiological function between the experimental group and the control group.5.3 The score of body pain before and after(BP): intervention in the experimental group was higher than that before intervention(P<0.05),but there was no significant difference between the control group and the control group(P>0.05).Comparison between groups: there was no significant difference between the experimental group and the control group after intervention(P>0.05),indicating that there was no significant difference in the improvement of body pain(BP)between the two intervention methods.5.4 The scores of the test group and the control group after intervention were higher than those before intervention(P<0.05).There was significant difference between the two groups(P>0.05).The(GH): of general health status was compared with that of the control group after intervention.There was no significant difference in the scores between the experimental group and the control group after intervention,indicating that the improvement of(GH)in the general health status of the two groups was similar.5.5 There was significant difference in the dimension score of energy(VT): between the two groups after intervention(P<0.05),and the six-word training group was better than the core training group.Analysis and comparison between groups showed that the energy of the experimental group was higher than that of the control group after intervention.5.6 The score of social function in(SF): group before and after intervention was significantly higher than that before intervention in the experimental group(P>0.05),but there was no significant difference in the dimension score in the control group before and after intervention(P <0.05).After intervention,there was significant difference in the improvement of social function(SF)between the experimental group and the control group,and the experimental group was better than the control group.5.7 The scores of emotional function(RE): test group before and after intervention were compared,and the results showed that the six-word formula could significantly improve the emotional function of patients with low back pain,while there was no statistical difference in the control group before and after intervention,but the improvement in the dimension of emotional function in the core training group was not obvious.The scores of the two groups after intervention were compared between the two groups,and the score of the test group was better than that of the control group,and there was statistical difference(P<0.05).5.8 Mental health(MH): in the two groups before and after intervention,the scores after intervention were higher than those before intervention,and there was significant difference(P<0.05).The mental health of patients with low back pain was improved by the two training methods.There was significant difference between the two groups(P>0.05),which showed that the experimental group was better than the control group in improving effect.5.9 Health change(HT): compared the two groups within the group,the results of the two groups had no change before and after the intervention,indicating that the improvement of the two ways in the dimension of health change was not obvious.The results after intervention were compared between groups,and there was no statistical difference.The two training methods have no significant effect on the improvement of health change(HT).ConclusionsAfter 4 weeks of exercise training,the Liuzijue training group and the traditional core stability training group all treated the waist discomfort symptoms,surface electromyography,and pain symptoms(VAS)of the chronic low back pain subjects with liver and kidney deficiency,Oswestry dysfunction index(ODI)and quality of life score have been alleviated and improved.The Liuzijue training group is more effective than the traditional core stability training group in improving waist discomfort symptoms,waist electromyography surface electromyography,pain symptoms(VAS score),Oswestry dysfunction index(ODI)and quality of life. |
PDF Full Text Request