A Clinical Research Of 3D Balance Spine-setting Manipulation Combining With Nerve Stimulation Treating Protrusion Of Lumbar Disc Herniation

ObjectivesTo compare the curative effect of 3D balance spine-setting manipulation combining with nerve stimulation and the curative effect of single use of two treatment methods.By analyzing the clinical effect,lumbar vertebra function score and pain score difference of three methods,to evaluate the clinical treatment effect and prognosis curative effect of three methods.To explore the clinical curative effect and functioning mechanism of 3D balance spine-setting manipulation combining with nerve stimulation treating protrusion of lumbar disc herniation.Methods150 patients were randomly divided into three groups with random table method.There were 50 cases in the treatment group,treated with 3D balance spine-setting manipulation combining with nerve stimulation;50 cases in the first control group,treated with 3D balance spine-setting manipulation;50 cases in the second control group,treated with nerve stimulation.Patients from three groups were diagnosed and evaluated according to diagnosis criteria of protrusion of lumbar intervertebral disc in Criteria of Diagnosis and Therapeutic Effect of Traditional Chinese Syndrome.Japanese Orthopaedic Association(JOA)low back pain rating scale and visual analogue scale(VAS)score were used to conduct comprehensive rating on symptoms and signs of patients from different groups before treatment,after treatment and 6 month after treatment and to compare the improvement of lumbar vertebra and the pain relieve condition.Results1.Comparing clinical curative effects of three groups,the treatment group was better than the two control groups(P<0.05).2.After treatment,JOA scores of three groups were evidently increased(P<0.05),VAS scores were evidently lower compared with that before treatment(P<0.05).In comparison among groups,JOA and VAS scores of the treatment group after treatment had significant different with two control groups(P < 0.05);during the 6-month follow-up visit,the treatment group still maintain the advantage(P<0.05).During the 6-month follow-up visit,JOA scores of the first control group were evidently higher than that of the second control group(P<0.05).VAS scores of the second control group after the treatment course were evidently lower than that of the first control group(P<0.05).Conclusions1.The treatment methods of three groups all have curative effect and the treatment group is better than two control groups in curative effect.2.The treatment methods of three groups can all improve the lumbar vertebra function and the treatment has a larger improving range compared with the two control groups.3.The treatment methods of three groups all have pain-killing effect while the pain-killing effect of the treatment group was better than the two control groups.4.The second control group has an unsteady improvement on the lumbar vertebra,with a poorer prognosis,but the short-term pain-killing effect is better than the first control group.5.The treatment methods of three groups are all safe and only a few patients got local pain,fainting during acupuncture treatment,and there was no nerve root injury.6.The interworking of two treatment methods in the treatment group can promote circulation of qi and blood,dredge the channels,loose tissue adhesion of deep muscles,correct dislocation of facet joint,change the location relation of nerve root and protrusion,relieve waist pain and lower limb radicular neuralgia,etc.,and re-establish lumbar vertebra mechanical equilibrium.The combination use of these two methods can improve the curative effect without evident side effects,so it can be used to guide clinical treatment.