| ObjectiveTo observe the effects of opposing needling combined with rehabilitation training on motor dysfunction of stroke recovery.MethodsSixty patients were randomly divided into treatment group and control group, each with thirty cases. The two groups were accepted the control of blood pressure, blood glucose, blood lipid and improving cerebral circulation, brain nutrition, and other basic treatment. And both the two groups were gived the same rehabilitation training. The treatment group applied opposing needling, and the control group applied ordinary acupuncture.Results1. Baseline data:There were sixty patients in the two groups. There were seventeen men and thirteen women in the treatment group. The largest gage was seventy four years old, while the least age was fifty five years old, and the average age was64.63±5.13years old in it. The longest course of disease was forty two days, while the shortest course of disease was sixteen days, and the average course of disease was29.67±7.37days. There were sixteen men and fourteen women in the treatment group. The largest gage was seventy one years old, while the least age was fifty seven years old, and the average age was63.47±3.71years old. The longest course of disease was thirty nine days, while the shortest course of disease was fifteen days, and the average course of disease was28.27±7.92days. The baseline data in the two groups of gender, age and course of disease of the patients were not statistically significant, so there were comparability in the two groups.2. Evaluation in the stage of recovery of Brunnstrom:The difference was none tatistically significant in the two groups before treatment (P>0.05), so there were comparability in the two groups. Compared with the two groups before and after treatment, there was statistically significant(P<0.05). It indicated that both the treatment group and control group were helpful for the recovery of limb movement pattern. To compare the effects of two groups after treatment, there was statistically significant(P<0.05). The effects of treatment group was better than control group. Opposing needling combined with rehabilitation training was more conducive to the improvement of recovery of hemiplegic than the other.3. Motor function Fugl-meyer (FMA) evaluation’.Compared on upper limb function before treatment in the two groups, P=0.553, P>0.05. The differences were none tatistically significant, so there were comparability in the two groups. Before and after treatment in treatment group, P<0.01, and it was also in the control group. Compared the two groups after treatment, P<0.01. Compared the effects on lower limb function before treatment in the two groups, P=0.238, P>0.05. The difference were none tatistically significant, so there were comparability in the two groups. Before and after treatment in treatment group, P<0.01, and it was the same in the control group. Compared the two groups after treatment, P<0.01. Compared on limb function before treatment in the two groups, t=0.421, P=0.675, P>0.05. The differences were none tatistically significant, so there were comparability in the two groups. Compared on limb function before and after treatment in treatment group, t=57.73, P<0.01, there were statistically significant, and in the other group, t=39.46, P<0.01, there was also statistically significant. Compared the effects between the two groups after treatment, t=9.54, p<0.01, there was t=9.54, p<0.01. It means that both of the two methods were effective to improve motor function of patients, but the therapeutic effects of treatment group was much better than the other.4. Activities of daily living (ADL) evaluation:Compared on ADL before treatment in the two groups, t=0.424, P=0.673, P>0.05. The differences were none tatistically significant, so there were comparability in the two groups. Compared on the ability of daily life before and after treatment in treatment ggroup, t=13.82, P<0.01, there was statistically significant. And in the other group, t=10.05, P<0.01, there was also statistically significant. Compared the effects between the two groups after treatment, t=3.69, P=0.001,<0.01, there was s statistically significant. It means that both of the two methods were effective to improve the ability of daily life, but therapeutic effects in the treatment group is much better than control group, s.Conclusion1. Both opposing needling and normal acupuncture could promote the recovery of limbs function of stroke recovery.2. Comparaed with normal acupuncture, opposing needling could promote the period of flaccid paralysis into the spasm stage or separation motion stage, and it was also better than the other for long-term rehabilitation. Opposing needling was better than normal acupuncture in the improvement of motor function and the ability of daily life. It was worthy to promote this method in clinical practice. |
PDF Full Text Request