Clinical Study Of Moxibustion Treatment Efficiency On Knee Osteoarthritis By The TCM Theory Of Heart-gallbladder

ObjectivesTo observe the clinical effect of the method of moxibustion treatment efficiency on knee osteoarthritis(KOA) by the TCM theory of Heart-gallbladder, provide another ways to treat the KOA.Methods70patients suffered from KOA were collected from the out-patient and wards of Guangdong Provincial Hospital of TCM. Patients were completely randomly with the proportion of1:1distributed into treatment group and control group used PEMS3.1package, with35cases in treatment group,35cases in control group. Priscription for treatment group:Puncture Baihui (DU20), Yintang(EX-HN3),Nei-guan(PC6), Yanglingquan(GB34), above the points were used bilateral, moxibusti-on the points Xinshu(BL15),Danshu(BL19) for5times by the grain-sized moxa cones, subcutaneous needles were embedded on the Xinshu(BL15), Danshu(BL19). Priscription for control group:the puncture points and the subcutaneous needle points the same to the treatment group, but no moxa cones.Manipulating the needles until the Qi arrives, and retain the needles for30minites. Treatment duration:10times for one course, treatment would be finished in four weeks, there were at least two days between the collective two treatments. The curative effect was evaluated by the Lysholm Scale, McGill Scale before the course, after the five weeks, the end of the treatment and follow-up one month. Used statisti-cal software SPSS17.0on statistical analysis of data collected.Result1. By comparing the material before treatment, there was no significant difference between two groups by gender, age, disease duration, education level, previous treatment history, syndrome type, the scores of Lysholm Scale and McGill Scale, there was no statistically significant(P>0.05), showing a balance of baseline characteristics of the two groups and therefore they were comparable.2. In contrast with the effective rate after the end of treatment and the follow-up one month, the treatment group were87.9%,75.8%, while the control group were75.0%,62.5%, by the rank sun test, there were all singnificant difference(P<0.05), showing the treatment group had better effect than the control group to improve the function of the knee.3. By comparison the scores of Lysholm scale, after the treatment for five times, the end of the treatment and follow-up one month, compared the scores before the treatment, the scores of the two groups were rasied, both the groups had singnificant difference(P<0.01), showing both the methods of the two groups had efficacy to improve the function of the knee. Compared the difference between the two groups, after five times, there was no significant difference (P>0.05), indicating the two groups had the similar effect. At the end of the treatment, the two groups had significant difference(P<0.05), showing the treatment group had better efficacy than the control group. When follow-up one month, there was significant difference (P<0.01), also indicating the effect of the treatment group was superior to the control group.4. By comparison the scores of McGill scale, after the treatment for five times, the end of the treatment and follow-up one month, compared the scores before the treatment, the score were reduced, both the groups have singnificant difference(P<0.01), showing the two groups had effect to relieve the pain of the knee. Compared the difference between the two groups, after five times, there was no significant difference(P>0.05), indicating the two groups had the similar efficacy to relieve the pain. When the end of the treatment, the two groups had significant difference(P<0.01), showing the treatment group had better effect than the control group. When follow-up one month, there was significant difference(P<0.01), also indicating the effect of the treatment group was superior to the control group.Conclusion1. Both the treatment group and control group have clinical effect to treat the KOA. 2. The treatment group and control group have the similar short-term cinical effect, but at the end of the treatment and the follow-up one month, the treatment group has better clinical therapeutic effect than the control group.