Put Cholera Treatment Chronic Non-specific Low Back Pain Clinical Observation

Object:To investigate and evaluate the clinical curative effect on pricking bloodletting in the treatment of chronic nonspecific low back pain(CNLBP).Method:The60subjects in this study were chosen from the patients in the Acupuncture Department of Wangjing Hospital who meet the criteria of CNLBP and were then respectively given prick bloodletting and acupuncture therapy with prospective research method.Treatments were given to the group with pricking bloodletting once every7days, while3times every7days to that with acupuncture therapy.Both of the two groups have undergone treatment for1month. VAS evaluation, Oswestry dysfunction index were conducted both before and one month after the treatment. Follow-up observations were made respectively1and2months after the treatment.Adverse effects were being recorded during the whole process to ensure the safety of the patients. All the data were analyzed statistically by using the SPSS20.0software to observe and evaluate the changes happening to the two groups before treatment, after the treatment and in the follow-up observation.Result1.Main observing index indicate:it is statistically meaninful to compare the VAS scores (P=0.854>0.05)of pricking bloodletting group and acupuncture group before the treatment; After the treatment the VAS scores of prick bloodletting is2.30±0.651and the other is3.00±0.587,there is no statistical difference between the two groups within a given time period (P<0.01).There is also no statistical difference between their baseline and the VAS scores after the treatment and in the follow-up observation with the two groups(P>0.05). It is of statistical meaning to conduct an comparison between the two time period within the group (P<0.05)with a (70.72±6.682)%pain relieving rate of the pricking bloodletting group after the treatment, and (61.47±6.257)%in the follow-up observation. There is also no statistical difference in the comparison of the acupuncture therapy group between the two time period(P>0.05), the pain relieving rate being (75.56±5.897)%after the treatment and (75.30±5.522)%in the follow-up observation. However, inter-group comparison of this kind both after the treatment and in the follow-up session showed no statistical meaning(P<0.05).2.Secondary observing index showed: it is statistical meaninful to compare the ODI index of the pricking bloodletting group and acupuncture group before the treatment.The average scores of the prick bloodletting group is14.17±2.627and acupuncture therapy is8.23±2.402.There are obvious statistical differences in every observing period when comparing the ODI index between the two groups (P<0.01), the average number of the pricking bloodletting group being lower.Conclusion:Pricking bloodletting treatment of CNLBP can effectively relieve patients of lower lumbar, lumbar ministry, sacroiliac and hip pain, and can also improve patients’ lumbar function to a certain extent. Meanwhile, prick bloodletting therapy, with its characteristic of low frequency and less adverse reactions, can be promoted clinically.