| ObjectiveThis research applied the patient reported outcome:pain scale,TCM syndrome scale,WHOQOL-BREF,to observe the clinical efficacy and security of abdominal acupuncture in treating chronic tension type headache with Liver-Yang hypertension,which could inspire research ideas of abdominal acupuncture in treating chronic headache and popularize this appropriate technology.Methods8 4 chronic tension type headache patients of Liver-Yang hyperactivity,recruited from Guangdong Province TCM Hospital,were divided into treatment group and control group with 42 cases for each.Based on the randomized controlled clinical trial design,the treatment group applied the abdominal acupuncture acupointed in accordance with Abdominal Acupuncture Therapy;the control group applied the conventional acupuncture acupointed in accordance with textbook.Treatment was implemented every other day,3 times a week,for 4 consecutive weeks,and a total of 12 acupuncture treatments.Pain scale and TCM syndrome scale were observed as the main evaluation indicators.The WHOQOL-BREF scale was took as the minor indicator.All of the three scales were measured before and after treatment and the pain scale was observed at the follow-up of one month.The reduciton rate of pain scores and TCM syndrome scores were calculated as the efficacy criteria.The collected data were analyzed by software of SPSS 21.0.The analytial methods included repeated measures analysis of variance,chi-square test,t-test.P<0.05 was selected to show the significant difference.Results1 Baseline dataBy comparing the constitution of sex,the patients' age,the course of the disease and the pain scale score,TCM syndrome score before treatment of two groups' subjects no significant statistical difference was found(P>0.05).2 Pain scale2.1 Comparison within each groupPain scale score of treatment group before,after the treatment,follow-up of one month were 20.48±5.32,11.26±5.34,11.62±5.33.The difference was statistically significant before and after treatment(P<0.05).Pain scale score of control group before,after the treatment,follow-up of one month were 21.56±4.72,13.34±5.12,14.51±4.80.The difference was statistically significant before and after treatment(P<0.05).2.2 Comparison between two groupsPain scale score after the treatment:the treatment group was 11.26±5.34,the control group was 13.34±5.12.There was no statistically difference between two groups(P>0.05).Pain scale score in the one month follow-up: the treatment group was 11.62±5.33,the control group was 14.51±4.80.The difference between two groups was statistically significant(P<0.05).3 TCM syndrome scaleTCM syndrome scale score of treatment group before and after the treatment were 19.02± 1.63,6.36 ±3.69.The difference was statistically significant before and after treatment(P<0.05).TCM syndrome scale score of control group before and after the treatment were 18.73± 1.45,8.07 ±3.64.The difference was statistically significant before and after treatment(P<0.05).The difference between two groups after the treatment was statistically significant(P<0.05).4 WHOQOL-BREFWHOQOL-BREF score in physiological field,psychological field,social relations field,environmental field of treatment group before the treatment were 9.37±1.18,9.08±1.25,9.87±1.77,9.14±1.12 and after the treatment were 12.05 ± 0.80,11.86 ± 1.31,12.51 ± 1.61,11.68 ± 1.02.The difference was statistically significant before and after treatment(P<0.05).WHOQOL-BREF score in each field of control group before the treatment were 9.41±0.99,9.02±1.34,9.79±1.35,9.46±1.01 and after the treatment were 11.94 ± 0.70,11.63 ± 1.12,12.26 ± 1.64,11.40 ± 0.85.The difference was statistically significant before and after treatment(P<0.05).There was no statistically difference in each field between two groups after the treatment(P>0.05).5 Clinical efficacy comparisonAccording to pain scale score,there was no statistically significant difference between two groups after the treatment(P > 0.05).There was a statistically significant difference between two groups in the one month follow-up(P<0.05).According to TCM syndrome score,there was a statistically significant difference between two groups after the treatment(P<0.05).Conclusion1.Abdominal acupuncture in treating CTTH is safe and effective.The short-term efficacy is comparable to conventional acupuncture,and the long-term efficacy is superior to conventional acupuncture.2.Abdominal acupuncture is superior to comventional acupuncture in improving the TCM syndromes of patients with CTTH of Liver-Yang hypertension.3.Abdominal acupuncture can effectively improve the quality of life of patients with CTTH of Liver-Yang hypertension.4.Abdominal acupuncture has the advantages of quick effect,stable curative effect and lesser pain.It has the clinical practicality of standardized prescription and operation as well as repeatability which is suitable for grassroots promotion. |
PDF Full Text Request