These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Efficacy observation of nonspecific low back pain treated with the dragon-tiger fighting needling method].
    Author: Zhao F, Cao DB, Yuan YQ, Luo J, Wen YY, Wang Y, Yu J.
    Journal: Zhongguo Zhen Jiu; 2012 Jun; 32(6):507-10. PubMed ID: 22741256.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To compare the difference in the clinical efficacy on nonspecific low back pain (NLBP) treated with the dragon-tiger fighting needling method, the uniform reinforcing-reducing method and the intermediate frequency physiotherapy. METHODS: Ninety cases of NLBP were randomly divided into a dragon-tiger fighting needling group (group A), an uniform reinforcing-reducing needling group (group B) and an intermediate frequency physiotherapy group (group C), 30 cases in each one. In the group A, the dragon-tiger fighting needling method was used. In the group B, the uniform reinforcing-reducing method was applied. Two groups of acupoints were prescribed. One group included Shenshu (BL 23), Dachangshu (BL 25), Weizhong (BL 40) and Ashi points. The other group included Qihaishu (BL 24), Guanyuanshu (BL 26), Kunlun (BL 60), Yaoyangguan (GV 3). These two groups of acupoints were used alternatively in the above two groups. In the group C, the intermediate frequency physiotherapy was adopted in the pain area of the lumbar region. The treatment was given once per day in each group. Six treatments made one session. Totally, 2 sessions were required. The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), the Oswestry Disability Index (ODD and the clinical efficacy were observed in each group. RESULTS: The scores of VAS and ODI were reduced obviously after treatment in each group (P < 0.05, P < 0.01). The score reducing in the group A was much more remarkable than those in the other two groups (all P < 0.05). The clinical curative rate was 30.0% (9/30), 23.3% (7/30) and 16.7% (5/30) in the group A, the group B and the group C, respectively. In comparison, the clinical efficacy in the group A was superior to that in either of the other groups (all P< 0.05). CONCLUSION: The dragon-tiger fighting needling method achieves the much better efficacy on NLBP compared with either the uniform reinforcing-reducing method or the intermediate frequency physiotherapy. It is one of the more effective needling method for analgesia.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]