| ObjectiveThe study aims to discuss whether the clinical efficacy according to the acupoint extraction under the guidance of the theory of Head Qi Jie of are better than the conventional acupoint extraction.Methods76 patients are randomly divided into two groups according:the acupuncure group of Head Qi Jie?treatment group?and the acupuncure group of conventional acupoint extraction?the control group?,and there are 38 cases in each group.The treatment group choses Baihui,Tian zhu,Fengchi as the main acupoints.For control group,the study chooses Shen men,Nei guan,Ba ihui,An mian and adds or subtracts acupoints according to the TCM syndrome differentiation.The two groups will be treated everyday,5 times at least per week,10 times'treatments as a course.It needs totally 2 courses to finish.We used PSQI?Pittsburgh sleep quality index,PSQI?,SF-36 questionares?the MOS36-Item Short Form Healthy Survey,SF-36?to evaluate the quality about sleeping and life,record the scores,analyses the datas before treatment,after1 treatmen and at the end of the treatmen while observes the adverse reations.ResultsThe study totally collected 76 patients,4 cases fell off,and finished finally 72 cases.Each group collected 36 cases.1.Baseline comparisonThere are no differences in two groups in patients'age,gender,course of disease,distributionofsyndrometype,PSQIintegralandtotal score,SF-36,MCS?Mental condition score,MCS?,PCS?Physical condition score,PCS?before treatment.They can be compared.2.Evaluation of clinical efficiencyThe treatment group's total effective rate is 80.56%after two courses.Especially 2 cases are cured,12 cases are effetive,15 cases have improvement,7 cases are invalid.The control group's total effective rate is75%after two courses.Especially 2 cases are cured,9 cases are effetive,16cases have improvement,9 cases are invalid.There was no statistical difference in the total effect of the two groups?P<0.05?.After the completion of the treatment,there was no significant difference in the efficiency of the five syndromes between the two groups?P>0.05?.3.PSQI questionare3.1 Total score?1?Intra group comparisonThe treatment group in 1stcourses'total scrore?11.50±2.02?compared wiht the before treatment?12.93±2.73?,had significant decline?P<0.05?.The control group in 1stcourses'total scrore?12.05±2.29?compared wiht the before treatment?13.00±2.61?,didn't have significant decline?P>0.05?.Both two groups'scores of 2ndcourses?8.05±2.31???8.85±3.18?compared with the beofre treatment and 1stcourses had significant decline?P<0.05?.The improvement of the total score of PSQI in the treatment group was similar to that of the control group.?2?Inter group comparisonAfter the 1stand 2ndtreatment:The treatment group's score didn't have significant decline that compared with the control group?P>0.05?.That indicated that the improvement of the total score of PSQI in the accupuncure group of Head Qi Jie was better than the group of conventional acupoint extraction.3.2 Quality of sleep?1?Intra group comparisonThe treatment group in 1stcourses'score of Quality of sleep?2.12±0.44?compared wiht the before treatment?2.79±0.62?,had significant decline?P<0.05?.The control group in 1stcourses'total scrore?2.38±0.59?compared wiht the before treatment?2.72±0.56?,didn't have significant decline?P>0.05?.Both two groups'scores of 2ndcourses?1.23±0.69???1.42±1.00?compared with the beofre treatment and 1stcourses had significant decline?P<0.05?.The improvement of the score of Quality of sleep in the treatment group was similar to that of the control group.?2?Inter group comparisonAfter the 1sttreatment:The treatment group's score had significant decline that compared with the control group?P<0.05?.After the 2ndtreatment:The treatment group's score didn't have significant decline that compared with the control group?P>0.05?.That indicated that at the end of the treatment,the two groups had similar effect on improving the sleep quality of the patients,and the treatment group had the advantage of quick onset.3.3 Time to fall asleep?1?Intra group comparisonThe treatment group in 1stcourses'scrore?1.91±0.58?compared wiht the before treatment?2.48±0.89?,had significant decline?P<0.05?.The control group in 1stcourses'total scrore?2.02±0.90?compared wiht the before treatment?2.54±0.87?,didn't have significant decline?P>0.05?.Both two groups'scores of 2ndcourses?1.74±0.60???1.85±1.05?compared with the beofre treatment,had significant decline?P<0.05?.The 2ndcourse'scrore compared with the 1stcourse didn't have the significant decline?P>0.05?.That indicated that the two groups can shorten the sleep time of patients after treatment.?2?Inter group comparisonAfter the 1stand 2ndtreatment:The treatment group's score of time to fall asleep didn't have significant decline that compared with the control group?P>0.05?.That indicated that the time to fall asleep in the treatment group was similar to that in the control group.3.4 Sleep time?1?Intra group comparisonThe treatment group in 1stcourses'scrore?1.81±0.47?compared wiht the before treatment?2.47±0.90?,had significant decline?P<0.05?.The control group in 1stcourses'total scrore?2.06±0.70?compared wiht the before treatment?2.37±0.82?,didn't have significant decline?P>0.05?.Both two groups'scores of 2ndcourses?1.69±0.53???1.80±0.68?compared with the beofre treatment,had significant decline?P<0.05?.The 2ndcourse'scrore compared with the 1stcourse didn't have the significant decline?P>0.05?.That indicated that the two groups can prolong the sleep time of the patients.?2?Inter group comparisonAfter the 1sttreatment:The treatment group's score had significant decline that compared with the control group?P<0.05?.After the 2ndtreatment:The treatment group's score didn't have significant decline that compared with the control group?P>0.05?.That indicated that the two groups had similar effects on prolonging patients'sleep time,and the treatment group had a quicker advantage.3.5 Sleep efficiency?1?Intra group comparisonThe treatment group in 1stcourses'scrore?1.98±0.83?compared wiht the before treatment?2.46±0.98?,had significant decline?P<0.05?.The control group in 1stcourses'total scrore?2.04±0.87?compared wiht the before treatment?2.38±0.98?,didn't have significant decline?P>0.05?.Both two groups'scores of 2ndcourses?1.56±0.92???1.61±0.79?compared with the beofre treatment had significant decline?P<0.05?.The 2ndcourses compared with 1stcourses:the treatment group had the significant decline and the control group didn't.That indicated that the two groups can improve the sleep efficiency of the patients.?2?Inter group comparisonAfter the 1stand 2ndtreatment:The treatment group's score didn't have significant decline that compared with the control group?P>0.05?.That indicated that the sleep efficiency in the treatment group was similar to that in the control group.3.6 Sleep disorder?1?Intra group comparisonBoth the treatment and control group in 1stcourses'scrores?1.26±0.55???1.30±0.53?,compared wiht the before treatment?1.38±0.70???1.38±0.59?,did't have significant decline?P>0.05?.Both two groups'scores of the 2ndcourses?0.74±0.64???0.88±0.67?compared with the beofre treatment and 1stcourse had significant decline?P<0.05?.That indicated that acupuncture treatment in two groups can improve sleep disorders.?2?Inter group comparisonAfter the 1stand 2ndtreatment:The treatment group's score didn't have significant decline that compared with the control group?P>0.05?.That indicated that the improvement of sleep disorder in the treatment group was similar to that in the control group.3.7 Daytime dysfunction?1?Intra group comparisonThe treatment group in 1stcourses'scrore?2.21±0.62?compared wiht the before treatment?2.66±0.73?,had significant decline?P<0.05?.The control group in 1stcourses'total scrore?2.25±0.64?compared wiht the before treatment?2.54±0.77?,didn't have significant decline?P>0.05?.Both two groups'scores of 2ndcourses?1.07±0.72???1.29±0.96?compared with the beofre treatment and 1sthad significant decline?P<0.05?.That indicated that the two groups can improve the patient's daytime function.?2?Inter group comparisonAfter the 1stand 2ndtreatment:The treatment group's score didn't have significant decline that compared with the control group?P>0.05?.That indicated that the daytime dysfunction in the treatment group was similar to that in the control group.4.SF-36 quality of life scale4.1 Mental condition score?MCS??1?Intra group comparisonThe treatment group in 1stcourses'scrore?54.81±4.02?compared wiht the before treatment?49.78±9.84?,had significant decline?P<0.05?.The control group in 1stcourses'total scrore?53.48±5.82?compared wiht the before treatment?50.97±8.00?,didn't have significant decline?P>0.05?.Both two groups'scores of 2ndcourses?56.21±3.16???55.19±5.40?compared with the beofre treatment had significant decline?P<0.05?,meanwhile,compared with1stcourse'score didn't have significant decline?P>0.05?.That indicated that after treatment,the two groups can improve the mental health of the patients.?2?Inter group comparisonAfter the 1stand 2ndtreatment:The treatment group's score didn't have significant decline that compared with the control group?P>0.05?.That indicated that MCS in the treatment group was similar to that in the control group.4.2 Physical condition score?PCS??1?Intra group comparisonBoth the treatment and control group in 1stcourses'PCS scores?55.86±5.06???56.30±7.94?,2ndcourses'scores?60.70±4.99???59.00±6.97?compared wiht the before treatment?52.29±6.37???52.16±7.29?,had significant raises?P<0.05?.The treatment group'score of 2ndcourses compared with 1stcourses of treatment had significant raises?P<0.05?,meanwhile,the control group didn't have the statistical difference?P>0.05?.That indicated that both two groups can improve the patients'physical condition by acupuncture.?2?Inter group comparisonAfter the 1stand 2ndtreatment:Both two group's score of PCS didn't had significant raises that compared with the control group?P>0.05?.That indicated that PCS in the treatment group was similar to that in the control group.4.3 SF-36 total score?1?Intra group comparisonBoth the treatment and control group in 1stcourses'SF-36 scores?110.67±5.60???109.78±9.48?,2ndcourses'scores?115.27±5.84???114.20±8.99?compared wiht the before treatment?104.35±11.61???104.64±11.43?,had significant raises?P<0.05?.The treatment group'score of 2ndcourses compared with 1stcourses of treatment had significant raises?P<0.05?,meanwhile,the control group didn't have the statistical difference?P>0.05?.That indicated that both two groups can improve the patients'life quality.?2?Inter group comparisonAfter the 1stand 2ndtreatment:Both two group's score didn't had significant raises that compared with the control group?P>0.05?.That indicated that the life quality in the treatment group was similar to that in the control group.5.Adverse reaction:no adverse reaction was found in all two groups.Conclusion1.Both of the group of Head Qi Jie and conventional acupoint extraction can improve the sleep quality,psychological and physical health and quality of life.2.Compared with the group of conventional acupoint extraction,the head Qi Street acupuncture group is more effective in improving the quality of sleep and prolonging the sleep time,and the advantage of removing the acupoint is worth popularizing in clinical practice. |
PDF Full Text Request