Clinical Research Of Nonsurgical Spinal Decompression DRX9000for Treatment Of Lumbar Disc Herniation

Objective This study compares the effect of nonsurgical spinal decompressionDRX9000and conventional traction in patients with lumbar disc herniation (LDH).Methods40patients in remission period（7-30days after the first time of onset）and40patients in recovery period(more than30days after the first time of onset) wereincluded. Patients in remission period were randomly assigned into remission-periodtreatment group or control group, and patients in recovery period were also randomlyinto recovery-period treatment group or control group. Each group consists of20patients. All patients received education about LDH, lumbar supports andtranscutaneous electrical neuromuscular stimulation (TENS).On the basis of thosemeasures, two treatment groups were given traction by nonsurgical spinaldecompression DRX9000and two control groups were given conventional traction byOL-2000lumbar traction apparatus. The efficiency of DRX9000and OL-2000wereevaluated after all treatment. Severity of pain by VAS, functional disability byOswestry Disability Questionnaire and JOA were assessed at baseline,2,4and6weeksafter treatment. Magnetic resonance imaging examinations were done before and after6-week treatment to measure the size of the herniated disc material.Results1.There were no difference of the efficiency between treatment group andcontrol group.2.In remission-period treatment group and control group, no statisticallysignificant differences were found on VAS,ODI and JOA beforetreatment(P>0.05),VAS and ODI scores decreased and JOA scores increased withtreatment extending(data after treatment compared with data before treatment, P<0.05),significant differences were found after treatment between those twogroups(P<0.05);3.In recovery-period treatment group and control group, no statisticallysignificant differences were found on VAS,ODI and JOA beforetreatment(P>0.05),VAS and ODI scores decreased and JOA scores increased withtreatment extending(data after treatment compared with data before treatment, P<0.05),no significant differences were found after treatment between those two groups (P>0.05);4. In remission-period treatment group and control group, no statisticallysignificant differences were found on length and area of herniated disc material beforetreatment (P>0.05), significant differences of those measures were found before andafter treatment (P<0.05); significant differences were found between those twogroups(P<0.05);5. In recovery-period treatment group and control group, nostatistically significant differences were found on length and area of herniated discmaterial before treatment (P>0.05), no significant differences of those measures werefound before and after treatment (P>0.05).Conclusions1.There were no difference of the efficiency between DRX9000andconventional lumbar traction apparatus;2. DRX9000was more effective thanconventional lumbar traction apparatus for patients in remission period of LDH;3.There was no difference between the effect of DRX9000and conventional lumbartraction apparatus for patients in recovery period of LDH;4. About patients inremission period of LDH, the size of herniated disc material could be decreased moreobvious by DRX9000than by conventional lumbar traction apparatus;5.About patientsin recovery period of LDH, traction and physiotherapy could reduce pain and improvefunction, but the size of herniated disc material could not be decreased.