Clinical Research On Meridians Through Thorn Teratment In Treating Scapulohumeral Periarthritis

ObjectiveFrom the Poin to fview of elinieal observation, to make objective clinical efficacy evaluation of penetration acupuncture treatment of Scapulohumeral Periarthritis. And to gave essential basis for hunting the effective methods of treatment on Scapulohumeral Periarthritis in clinic. All this conduced to better application and spreading in clinic.Methods60 patients with periarthritis of the shoulder were equally randomized to two groups(treatment group and control group, with 30 cases each). The criteria of diagnosis and adopted various treatment Parameters were fixed, and pain of the shoulder, function and activity of the shoulder joint were used as observation indexes. The results and conclusion are based on the statistical processing and analysis of the index.Treatment group:Penetration needing to yanglao through waiguan、jianyu through binao、jianliao through naohui、quchi through shaohai. Control group: not using penetration needing. Acupuncture points with treatment group. Operation:(treatment group)1. First of the acupuncture:The patient taken to lateral recumbent position or sitting. After routine sterilization on the acupuncture points. Selection diameter of 0.3-0.35 Millimeters stainless filiform needle in length 1-1.5 chun then treated. Acupuncture yanglao through waiguan、jianyu through binao、jianliao through naohui、quchi through shaohai. The concrete intensity varied by patient tolerance degree. (control group): 2. The operation identically treatment group, not using penetration needling method.Results1. As to the treatment group, there was 7 male patients and 23 female patients and age range of the patients was from 43 and 57 years old.The average age was 49.97±3.24 years old. The control group, there was 9 male patients and 21 female patients and age range of the patients was from 41 and 59 years old. The average age was 50.23±4.68 years old. There was no significant difference in the gender, mean age and course of disease (P>0.05). This showed that there was comparability between the control group and the treatment group.2. After the therapy, the VAS score of the control group was 3.13±0.97, while the VAS score of the treatment group was 4.70±1.39. It showed there was significant difference between the treatment group and control group (P<0.01), indicating that the treatment group was superior to the other group.3. After the therapy, the decrease of the pain score of the control group was 19.80±3.03, while the decrease of the pain score of the treatment group was 26.27±5.07. It showed there was significant difference between the treatment group and control group (P<0.01), indicating that the treatment group was superior to the other group. After the therapy, the decrease of shoulder joint activity function integral of the control group was 5.43±1.31, while the decrease of the pain score of the treatment group was 7.93±2.20. It showed there was statistically different between the treatment group and control group (P<0.01). In terms of improvement of shoulder joint activities, the treatment group was superior to the other group.4. After the therapy, the treatment group had a significant improved rate of 93.33%, while the control group had a significant improved rate of 73.33%. It showed there was difference between the treatment group and control group (P<0.05).