Clinical Research Of Tapping And Cupping Treatment Of Post Herpetic Neuralgia Combined With Electro Acupuncture

In previous study (national "eleven five" science and technology support program "Different acupuncture methods in treating herpes zoster Advantage program selection for clinical RCT studies") basis, through clinical RCT study, using different methods of acupuncture (tapping and cupping combined with electro acupuncture and electro acupuncture) treatment of post herpetic neuralgia (PHN), to evaluate the clinical effect of two methods, to observe the clinical efficacy of two therapeutic methods in treatment of post herpetic neuralgia, optimal treatment regimens in clinical treatment of post herpetic neuralgia.Methods:All the62cases were from Chengdu Second People’s Hospital and Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine hospital, randomly, in strict accordance with the diagnostic criteria, inclusion criteria and exclusion criteria selected cases, will be randomly divided all the patients into two groups:the treatment group (electro acupuncture(EA)+tapping and cupping) and the control group (electro acupuncture treatment), comprehensive observation of biological quotas (including vital signs, basic medical history collection), curative effect evaluation quotas (including visual analogue scale, analgesia time, dermatology quality of life scales), safety quotas, research evaluation quotas(compliance, shedding rate), scientific and objective evaluation of clinical efficacy of combined electro acupuncture treatment of tapping and cupping the disease, treatment options for clinical safe, effective, simple operation, convenient clinical.Results:1,At baseline, compared with treatment group and control group:two groups of vital signs, age, sex, baseline condition is good, the difference has statistical significance, has a strong comparability (P>0.05);2, curative effect evaluation quotas:(1) visual analogue scale (VAS method) tips the VAS score of treatment group was better than the control group, the difference was statistically significant (P <0.05);(2) the treatment group comparison of analgesic prescription scores were better than the control group, two groups of results comparable, the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05);(3) the treatment group and the control group of the dermatology quality of life scales (DQOLS):the treatment group and the control group can improve the patients DQOLS score, there was no significant difference (P>0.05);3, the treatment group and the control group of safety evaluation quotas contrast:two groups of treatment method has good safety, no adverse reaction and complication, the difference was not significant (P>0.05).