欢迎访问《现代生物医学进展》编辑部！

目的：通过临床研究探讨电针治疗膝关节骨性关节炎的最佳参数，为临床提供更加规范性的治疗，进一步提高电针疗效。方法：将符合膝关节骨性关节炎诊断标准的73 例单膝患者随机分为电针疏波组、密波组两组，均针刺患侧膝眼穴，疏波组接2Hz 连续波治疗，密波组接40Hz 连续波治疗，采用WOMAC 评分对两组治疗后疼痛、僵硬、躯体功能进行评估，同时判断1 个疗程及3 个疗程治疗效果。结果：经统计学处理，完成第一疗程后，两组疼痛评分比较，P 均＜0.01，说明两组在疼痛疗效上存在差异。而两组僵硬和躯体功能评分的比较，P>0.05,显示两组没有统计学意义。第3 疗程后，两组WOMAC 总分比较，P 均＜0.01，具有极显著性差异，第3 疗程症状积分低于第1 疗程，说明第3 疗程后症状改善优于第1 疗程。结论：电针疏波组在改善疼痛上优于密波组；第3 疗程后，总体症状改善情况优于第1 疗程。

英文摘要:

Objective: To study the best optimal parameters of electro-acupuncture in treating knee osteoarthritis,and to provide more normative treatment for clinicians. Methods: Randomly divide 73 patients consistent with the standard efficacy into EA sparse wave group of 36 cases, dense wave acupuncture group of 37 cas- es. Sparse wave group receives acupuncture and 2Hz wave therapy, dense wave group receives 40Hz wave treatment, both groups are acupointed Xiyan point, and receives 1 treatment every other day, 45min/everytime, and 10 times as a course of treatment, continuing for 3 courses. After treatment, respectively determine 1 course treatment and 3 courses treatment. Take detailed records according to the clin- ical symptom, focus on observing the efficacy of each single symptom between each group, as well as the effect of treatment course to this research. Results: After 1st and 3rd course of treatment, compare with each other, total score are P <0.01, refers to highly significant differences, and score of 3rd course is under 1st, explain the 3rd course has a better efficacy than 1st. Conclusion: Both EA sparse wave group and dense wave group have a good effect in improving symptoms of knee osteoarthritis, and EA sparse wave group has better effi- cacy in improving pain symptom. The 3rd course has a better efficacy than 1st.

View Full Text View/Add Comment Download reader