Randomized Controlled Trials On The Clinical Effects Of Screwing And Raising Manipulation In Treating Cervical Spondylosis Of Neck Type

BackgroundAt present, with the rapid development of economy, culture, information technology, work and lifestyle of people have taken place a huge change. Incidence of cervical spondylosis(CS) is rising and presents generation and younger trend in resent years. As the early of cervical spondylosis of other type, cervical spondylosis of neck type is very common clinically and also the best stage of cervical spondylosis treatment. Therefore, the treatment of cervical spondylosis of neck type plays an important role in prevention and treatment of CS. Screwing and Raising Manipulation in treating cervical spondylosis of vertebral artery type has the characteristics of " Simple, Convenient, Cheap, Effective ", and widely accepted by patients. Screwing and Raising Manipulation achieve the goal of treatment by improving static and dynamic balance of cervical vertebra, correcting joint displacement, improving blood circulation.ObjectiveEvaluate the effect and safety of Screwing and Raising Manipulation in treating cervical spondylosis of neck type.Methods1Cases groupingNinety patients were collected according to diagnostic standard and inclusion criteria of cervical spondylosis of neck type and were randomly divided into experimental group(45cases) and control group(45cases) throuth random number table. Patients in the two groups in the gender, age, duration, total symptoms and signs integrals before treatment, single symptoms and signs integrals before treatment, the statistics analysis are not significant (P>0.05), two groups of general material are comparable.2Therapies Treatment group:manipulation therapy. Control group:traction therapy.3Observation indexes3.1General vital signs of patients. 3.2Clinical symptoms and signs using symptoms and signs integrals scale.3.3Neck pain degree judgement using visual analogue scale(VAS).3.4Application of a helmet to measure cervical motion.3.5Curative effect evaluation standard according to 《diagnosis of disease and curative effect of TCM standards)) issued by the state administration of traditional Chinese medicine.3.6Adverse reactions records record adverse reactions during the treatment.4Statistical analysisMeasurement data using mean±standard deviation(x±s), intra-group comparison with paired t test, intergroup comparison with independent-samples t test, enumeration data with χ2test, ranked data with rank sum test, all data processing was used by SPSS13.0. P<0.05indicated that the difference was statistically significant.Results1Comparison between2groups after treatment in clinical effectThe total effect rate of treatment group was86.67%, while that of control froup was84.44%. there was no statistical significance between2gtoups(P>0.05).2Comparison between2groups3months after treatment in clinical effectThe total effect rate of treatment group was77.78%, while that of control froup was62.22%. there was statistical significance between2gtoups(P<0.05), the former was better than the latter.3Comparison between2groups before and after treatment in total symptoms and signs integralsThere was statistical significance before and after treatment of2groups in improvement of total symptoms and signs integrals(P<0.01); There was no statistical significance between2groups in difference before and after treatment of total symptoms and signs integrals (P>0.05).4Comparison between2groups before and3months after treatment in total symptoms and signs integralsThere was statistical significance before and3months after treatment of2groups in improvement of total symptoms and signs integrals(P<0.01or P<0.05); There was statistical significance between2groups in difference before and3months after treatment of total symptoms and signs integrals (P<0.01). 5Comparison between2groups before and after treatment in single symptoms and signs integralsThere was statistical significance before and after treatment of2groups in improvement of neck pain integral, cervical motion integral, neck pressing pain integral and neck stiffness integral(P<0.01); There was no statistical significance between2groups in difference before and after treatment of neck pain integral, neck pressing pain integral and neck stiffness integral (P>0.05); There was statistical significance between2groups in difference before and after treatment of cervical motion integral(P<0.05).6Comparison between2groups before and3months after treatment in single symptoms and signs integralsThere was statistical significance before and3months after treatment of2groups in improvement of neck pain integral, cervical motion integral, neck pressing pain integral and neck stiffness integral(P<0.01or P<0.05); There was statistical significance between2groups in difference before and3months after treatment of neck pain integral, neck pressing pain integral and neck stiffness integral (P<0.05).7Safety observationDuring the study, patients in2groups had no obvious harmful reactions. Accordingly, it is safe to perform the study and apply Screwing and Raising Manipulation clinally.Conclusion1Both treatment group (Screwing and Raising Manipulation) and control group (traction) have significant short-term curative effects on improvement of symptoms and signs of cervical spondylosis of neck type.2Three months after treatment, curative effect of treatment group is better than that of control group in improving symptoms and signs, which shows that curative effect of treatment group is more durable.3Screwing and Raising Manipulation, being safe to apply, has rapid and durable effects on treating cervical spondylosis of neck type, so it deserves further research and extension.