DOC

"Triple" therapy in treating different efficacy of lumbar disc herniation_130

By Bobby Holmes,2014-10-30 08:14
8 views 0
"Triple" therapy in treating different efficacy of lumbar disc herniation_130

    "Triple" therapy in treating different efficacy of lumbar disc herniation

     Abstract Objective To investigate the "triple" therapy for different clinical effect of lumbar disc herniation. Method of treatment group, three-dimensional main ridge of the

    instrument, small needle-knife, acupuncture and comprehensive use of three kinds of governing law (known as "triple" therapy), the 980 cases of lumbar disc herniation treated control group, three-dimensional main ridge of the treatment

    alone , in accordance with lumbar intervertebral disc "bulging, prominent, extrusion" category grouping clinical efficacy, according to Macnab's waist after the evaluation criteria to assess efficacy. Results In the control group, a single instrument using three-dimensional main ridge of the

    three groups of cases treated by the statistical analysis of clinical efficacy of a very significant (P <0.01), the optimal efficacy of lumbar intervertebral disc prolapse, followed by the prominent, while the extrusion of the most difference.

    Using the "triple" therapy of the clinical efficacy of three groups is not very different, we can see there are outstanding and extrusion efficiency will be greatly increased. Conclusion "triple" therapy for different levels highlight the clinical

    effect of lumbar disc herniation were no significant sex differences. Therefore, different lumbar disc herniation, treatment methods, the use of flexible and can improve the clinical efficiency.

     Key words "triple" therapy of lumbar disc herniation

     We are in the 2003 06 ~ 2006 06 by lumbar

    intervertebral disc "bulging, prominent, extrusion," imaging classification methods, treatment of 980 cases of lumbar herniation between the subgroup of patients with clinical observation and analysis. These are as follows.

     1 Materials and methods

     1.1 Clinical data

     980 cases in 500 cases of male and female 480 cases, with an average age of 42 (16 ~ 78) years of age; average weight of 68 (42 ~ 120) kg; average height of 164 (145 ~ 183) cm, the

    average duration of 2.9 (1 d ~ 23 years ) year imaging examination; lumbar X-ray 326 cases, lumbar CT 451 cases of lumbar MRI 203 cases; lesion segments: L3 / 4 108 Li, L4 / 5 438 Li, L5/S1 434 cases; prominent type: Expansion out of 429 cases, 398 cases outstanding, 153 cases of prolapse; divided into treatment group of 600 cases and 380 cases of control group observations.

     1.2 Methods treatment group a "triple" therapy, group therapy alone three-dimensional main ridge of the instrument.

     1.2.1 Three-dimensional main ridge of the therapy

    equipment: three-dimensional main ridge of the treatment instrument.

     Group: Based on the lumbar spine CT or MRI examination results, select the "bulging, prominent, extrusion," three kinds of cases of varying degrees of lumbar intervertebral disc, group three-dimensional main ridge of the treatment and clinical observation.

     Treatment: The treatment parameters based on patient height and weight, combined with disease severity, age and

    physical development of traction situations such as distance, angle of flexion and rotation parameters of such treatment. Position: prone position in patients taking the chest cushion chest pad. According to iliac crest anatomical landmark and transformed the relationship between the corresponding intervertebral space to determine patient's position. Fixed: Using the automatic bundling equipment and support to patients with a fixed waist with a fixed and reliable. Slow pull: In order to improve patient treatment of lumbar organizations to

    quickly pull ability to adapt to repeated slow-pull treatment

    for 4 ~ 5 times.

     Fast pull: The lesions intervertebral positioned perpendicular to the lower edge of the side of the chest plate, both sides of the symmetrical swing rapid traction

    reset 4 times. Main ridge of the parameters: the distance 57 (49 ~ 66) cm, angle 22 ? (10 ~ 25 ?), rotated 24 ? (12 ~

    24 ?); the average number of treatment 1.56 (1 ~ 4) times; hospital stay was 9 (5 ~ 12) d.

     Bed rest: After treatment, patients with hospital bed rest arrangements for 1 week, was discharged 1 month outpatient review, or will urge bed rest at home, 1 week, 1 month after the review.

     1.2.2 Small needle-knife therapy for response points to reflect the point of treatment sites, regular skin

    disinfection, needle-knife with the flat edge upward mobility in the reaction-point needles, deep base reaction point, line vertical and horizontal peeling sparse 3 ~ 4 times, out of knife surgery with manipulation treatment, the 1 times / week,

    1 ~ 3 times as a course of treatment.

     1.2.3 acupuncture acupoints: lumbar Jiaji, ring jump, Cheng Fu, Wind City, Venezuela, Yang Ling-chuen, full three

    years, bearing mountains, Afghanistan is a cave, etc..

     Governing law: the waist acupuncture points, moxibustion cupping, I cave under the nerve entrapment, so as to pain-

    based techniques such as use of dragon and tiger fighting strong stimulation to the acupuncture waist and legs numb-

    based detection using Cang Turtle Point Method To have a sense

    of direct discharge is appropriate. 1 / d, 7 times for a course of treatment.

     1.2.4 Assessment according to Macnab's treatment of postoperative treatment of lumbar intervertebral disc evaluation criteria to be assessed, the pain disappeared and

    no motor function is limited and resume their normal work and activities of the superior; occasional Waist-Leg pain, can do

    as a good light; waist function improvement, there is still pain, and had to change the work and lifestyle can be; pain

    and dysfunction, without any improvement, required further surgical treatment was poor. Reposted elsewhere in the paper for free download http://

     Χ2 test statistical methods.

     2 Results

     2.1 treatment group, 600 cases, 266 cases of lumbar intervertebral disc prolapse, highlighting 239 cases, 95 cases of prolapse. 3 groups by chi-square test cases compared to

    three patients between excellent, good, and the percentage

    difference between the relapse rate is not statistically significant (P> 0.05). The results in Table 1. Table 1 Comparison of clinical treatment of patients Group 3 (omitted)

     2.2 The control group, 380 cases, 163 cases of lumbar

    intervertebral disc prolapse, highlighting 159 cases, 58 cases of prolapse. 3 groups by chi-square test cases compared to

    three patients between excellent, good, and recurrence rates compare to the percentage difference was significant (P

    <0.01). The results in Table 2. Among them, cases of lumbar in