Efects Of Acupuncture Therapy Of Dredging Governor Vessel For Regulating Mentality On Lumbar Disc Herniation

ObjectiveRandomized controlled clinical trials were adopted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of treating lumbar disc herniation with Acupuncture Therapy of Dredging Governor Vessel for Regulating Mentality through comparison with placebo acupuncture and regular acupuncture,so as to provide seientific theory and Practical evidence for its further application.MethodsA total of 90 lumbar disc herniation subjects conforming to the inclusion criteria were randomly divided into three groups:treatment group,control group 1 and a control group 2.All the cases observed in this study selecteded in the acupuncture clinics and acupuncture ward in The first affiliated hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine.Treatment group:Selected acupoints were Yaoyangguan,Mingmen,Houxi,Yaotongxue,Shuigou,Neiguan.Points slected were also according to treatment based on syndrome differentiation and according to meridians.The locations of acupoints were determined in accordance with the 2006 PRC national standard(GB/T 12346-2006)Name and Location of Acupoints.Mannipulation:Control group 1:Routine acupoints slection including Ashi point,Dachangshu and Weizhong(bilateral).Also treatment based on syndrome differentiation and meridians differentiation were used in slecting points.Control group 2:The methods of acupoint selection and operation are identical to that of the treatment group.Therapies were provided three times a week.A total of 12 times in one month and the interval of every two therapies was no less than 24 hours.JOA scale,MPQ scale and SF-36 scale were adopted for efficacy evaluation before treatment,at the end of treatment,at one month after the end of treatment and at three months after the end of treatmen.Safety assessment was conducted in combination with the records of adverse reactions.Descriptive analysis,chi-square test,nonparametric rank sum test,ANOVA and ANOVA on repeated measuring data were performed with SPSS20.0 software.Results1.Baseline comparison:Age,course,education,and sex had no difference within three groups.The same as to evaluation scales.2.JOA Scale:Compare with the score of befoe treatment,the difference of the JOA scores at each time point of the three groups were statistically significant(P=0.000)At the end of treatment:The difference of JOA score between treatment group and control group 1 and control group 2,was statistically significant(P=0.013 and 0.000).Between control group 1 and control group 2,threr was no statistically significant(P=0.38).JOA score after one month of treatment:Difference between treatment group and control group 2 was statistically significant(P=0.000);No difference was found between control group 1 and control group 2(P=0.082),the same as that of treatment group and control group 2(P=0.051).JOA score after three months of treatment:Differences were found statistically significant between treatment group and control group 1(P=0.029);as to between treatment group and control group 2 was statistically significant(P=0.000);No difference was found between control group 1 and control group 2(P=0.051).2.MPQ scoresCompare the MPQ scores at each time point of the three groups with that of before treatment,Differences were statistically significant(Pvalues was 0.000).MPQ score at the end of treatment:Difference between treatment group and control group 1 was statistically significant(P=0.0026),the same as to treatment group and control group 2(P=0.0026).the difference between control groupland control group 2 was statistically significant(P=0.022).MPQ score after one month of treatment:There were statistically significant differences between treatment group and control group 1(P=0.012),also the same as to between treatment group and control group 2the difference between treatment group and control group 2 was statistically significant(P=0.000);the difference between control group 1 and control group 2 was statistically significant(P=0.036).MPQ score after one month of treatment:There were differences between treatment group and control group 1 and treatment group and control group 2(P value were 0.046 and 0.000);Also,difference was found between control group 1 and control group 2,there was statistically significant(P=0.010).3.SF-36Within group:Compare the 8 domains scores at each time point of the treatment groups with those of before treatment,Differences were statistically significant(P<0.05).As to control group 1,differences were found in PF,GH,VT,SF,RE and MH.Differences were found in RP(P<0.05),VT,SF domains within control group 2(P<0.05).Domains at the end of treatment:Comparing treatment group with contol group 1,The differences were statistically significant at physical function,vitality,emotional and mental health(P values were 0.020,0.018,0,035,0.018).Comparing treatment group with contol group 2,The differences was statistically significant at physical functioning,bodily pain,vitality,social role functioning,emotional role functioning and mental health domains(P values were 0.003,0.018,0.018,0.012,0.014,0.002);The difference between control group 1 and control group 2 was statistically significant only at physical functioning(P values were 0.010).Domains after one month of treatment:Comparing treatment group with contol group 1,The difference was statistically significant at body pian,vitality and social functioning and emotional role functioning(P values were 0.010,0.006,0.070,0.031).There were differences at at seven domains except general health compare with treatment group and control group 2(P values were0.017,0.005,0.008,0.010,0.012,0.023,0.002);No difference was found between control group 1 and control group 2.Domains after three months of treatment:Comparing treatment group with contol group 1,The difference was statistically significant at body pian,vitality and emotional role functioning(P values were 0.009,0.023,0.010).The difference between treatment group and control group 2 was statistically significant at physical functioning,physical role functioning bodily pain,vitality,social role functioning,emotional role functioning and mental health(P values were 0.011?0.019?0.006?0.035?0.021?0.008?0.010).Difference was found only at mental health between control group 1 and control group 2(P =0.040).5.Effective rateEffective rate was evaluated by comparing of treatment group with that of control group 1 and control group 2 at three time points.The rate were respectively 80%,66.7%%and 46.7%at the end of treatment,73.3%,63.3%and 50%at one minth after treatment,70%,60%and 43.3%at 3 month after treatment,All of them had statistical differences(P<0.05).ConclusionIt was indicated by this clinical trial that:therapies for the treatment group can improve the scores of JOA scale and SF-36 QOL scale,lower the MPQ score,and relieve the lumbago symptom in patients with lumbar disc herniation effectively and improve the QOL of patients;the therapeutic effect in the treatment group was superior to that in the control groups.