The Early Clinical Curative Effect Observation Of The Waist Fumigation Prescription On Residual Low Back Pain After Percutaneous Kyphoplasty

Method:Conform the inclusion criteria during the December 2014 to the December 2015 in People’s Hospital, Fujian University of Traditional Chinese Orthopedics. There are 60 patients of Percutaneous kyphosis treatment with residual low bak pain, random order divided into control group (hot water group), treatment group (waist fmigation rescription group), set 30 patients in each group. The treatment group:using the waist fumigation prescription to treat, the temperature is 40℃ and 30 minutes funigation everyday,one week is a course.The control group:using the hot water to fumigation treat, the temperature is 40℃ and 30 minutes funigation everyday,one week is a course. Two group of patients were practiced in the treatment of osteoporosis on the basis of anti. Record patients VAS visual analogue score, ODI score, the ability to assess the activity and number of pathological segment tenderness before treatment,1 week treatment, and 2 weeks treatment. The patients will be followed up by telephone after 3 mouths of treatment. The results data will be processed by SPSS 17.0 statistical software.Results:After randomized pain control treatment to 60 percutaneous vertebroplasty kyphosis residual postoperatives, results are as follows:1. Comparing sex, age, segmental lesions in patients before treatments, the results show that there were no significant difference (P> 0.05) between them, that is comparable.2.The VAS visual analogue scale:The VAS score of the treatment group and the control group before treatment. After tested, P> 0.05, there were no significant difference showing; After one week’s treatment, their VAS scores through examination, P<0.05, they showed a significant differences; After 2 weeks’treatment, their VAS scores through examination, P <0.05,they showed a significant differences; Two groups have a significant difference in their statistic after the two groups before treatment,1 week,2 weeks of treatment, showing a statistical worth.3. ODI Rating:The ODI rating of the treatment group and the control group before treatment. After tested, P> 0.05, there were no significant difference showing; After one week’s treatment, their ODI rating through examination, P<0.05, they showed a significant differences; After 2 weeks’treatment, their ODI rating through examination, P<0.05,they showed a significant differences; Two groups have a significant difference in their statistic after the two groups before treatment,1 week,2 weeks of treatment, showing a statistical worth.NOTE:ODI index is a percentage number. Refer to the specific Appendix form.4. The ability of activity assessment:The ability of activity assessment of the treatment group and the control group before treatment. After the treatment group and the control group before treatment. After tested, P>0.05, there were no significant difference showing; After one week’s treatment, their ability of activity assessment through examination, P<0.05, they showed a significant differences; After 2 weeks’treatment, their ability of activity assessment through examination, P<0.05,they showed a significant differences; Two group have a significant difference in their statistic after the two groups before treatment,1 week,2 weeks of treatment, showing a statistical worth.5.The number of pathological segment tenderness spots:The number of pathological segment tenderness spots of the treatment group and the control group before treatment. After the treatment group and the control group before treatment. After tested, P>0.05, there were no significant difference showing; After one week’s treatment, their number of pathological segment tenderness spots through examination, P<0.05, they showed a significant differences; After 2 weeks’treatment, their number of pathological segment tenderness spots through examination, P<0.05,they showed a significant differences; Two group have a significant difference in their statistic after the two groups before treatment,1 week,2 weeks of treatment, showing a statistical worth.6.The overall efficacy results of two different treatment showed:The treatment group, of which the cure rate was30.0%,markedly effective rate was 46.7%, improvement rate was 23.3%,0% inefficiency; The control group, with a cure rate of 6.7%, markedly effective rate of 10.0%, improvement rate of 80.0%,3.3% inefficiency. The treatment group curative effect is higher than the control group. The effect of contrast between the two groups P<0.05, there are differences.Conclusion:1. Treatment for percutaneous vertebral kyphosis angioplasty residual pain, the waist fumigation prescription treatment than hot water fumigation treatment significantly;2. The waist fumigation prescription treatments for percutaneous vertebral kyphosis angioplasty residual low back pain has a precise and effective effect, patient acceptance of advantages, can be recommended to become a treatment for percutaneous vertebroplasty kyphosis residual back pain.