[Rolling needle pricking-cupping therapy and traditional pricking-cupping therapy for cervical spondylosis of neck type: a randomized controlled trial]

Zhongguo Zhen Jiu. 2020 Dec 12;40(12):1299-303. doi: 10.13703/j.0255-2930.20191019-k0001.
[Article in Chinese]

Abstract

Objective: To compare the clinical efficacy between rolling needle pricking-cupping (RNP-C) and traditional pricking-cupping (TP-C) for cervical spondylosis of neck type.

Methods: A total of 96 patients with cervical spondylosis of neck type were randomly divided into an RNP-C group, a TP-C group and an electroacupuncture (EA) group, 32 cases in each group. Each group was treated with EA at Jingbailao (EX-HN 15), Fengchi (GB 20), Dazhui (GV 14), Jianjing (GB 21) and ashi points with continuous wave and 2 Hz of frequency; each EA treatment lasted for 20 min, once every 3 to 5 days, totaling 6 treatments. On the basis of EA treatment, the patients in the TP-C group were treated with bloodletting by seven-star needle, followed by fire cupping; the patients in the RNP-C group were treated with bloodletting by rolling needle, followed by fire cupping. The treatment was given once a week for 4 weeks. The follow-up was 1 month. Before treatment, 2 and 4 weeks into treatment and follow-up, the Northwick Park neck-pain questionnaire (NPQ) and visual analogue scale (VAS) scores were evaluated. The acupuncture pain degree was recorded at the first treatment and 2 and 4 weeks into treatment. The efficacy was evaluated after 4 weeks of treatment.

Results: Compared before treatment, the scores of NPQ and VAS in each group were all reduced at 2 and 4 weeks into treatment and follow-up (P<0.05). The scores of NPQ in the TP-C group and the RNP-C group were lower than those in the EA group at 2 and 4 weeks into treatment (P<0.05). The scores of VAS in the TP-C group and the RNP-C group were lower than those in the EA group at 2 and 4 weeks into treatment and follow-up (P<0.05). The differences of NPQ and VAS scores between the TP-C group and the RNP-C group at each time point after treatment were not significant (P>0.05). The acupuncture pain degree in the RNP-C group was lower than that in the TP-C group (P<0.05). The total effective rates were 79.3% (23/29) in the TP-C group and 75.0% (24/32) in the RNP-C group, which was superior to 63.3% (19/30) in the EA group (P<0.05), but there was no statistical significance between the TP-C group and the RNP-C group (P>0.05).

Conclusion: TP-C and RNP-C could both improve the cervical pain symptoms in patients with cervical spondylosis of neck type, and improve the overall function of the cervical spine, and the curative effect is similar.

目的:比较滚针拔罐法与传统絮刺拔罐法治疗颈型颈椎病的临床疗效。方法:将96例颈型颈椎病患者随机分为滚针拔罐组、传统絮刺拔罐组和电针组,每组32例。3组均予电针治疗,穴取颈百劳、风池、大椎、肩井、阿是穴,连续波,频率2 Hz,留针20 min,每3~5天1次,共治疗6次;在电针治疗基础上,传统絮刺拔罐组采用七星针叩刺放血,滚针拔罐组采用滚针滚刺放血,于叩刺或滚刺部位加拔火罐,每周1次。共治疗4周,治疗结束后随访1个月。于治疗前,治疗2、4周后,治疗结束后随访时观察各组患者Northwick Park颈痛量表(NPQ)评分和视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分变化;于首次治疗、治疗2周、治疗4周时评价传统絮刺拔罐组和滚针拔罐组患者针刺疼痛度;于治疗4周后评定疗效。结果:各组患者治疗2、4周,随访时NPQ评分和VAS评分均较治疗前降低(P<0.05);传统絮刺拔罐组和滚针拔罐组治疗2、4周NPQ评分低于电针组(P<0.05),治疗2、4周及随访时VAS评分低于电针组(P<0.05),传统絮刺拔罐组和滚针拔罐组治疗后各时间点NPQ、VAS评分比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。滚针拔罐组患者滚针滚刺疼痛度低于传统絮刺拔罐组七星针叩刺(P<0.05)。传统絮刺拔罐组和滚针拔罐组总有效率为79.3%(23/29)和75.0%(24/32),优于电针组的63.3%(19/30,P<0.05),而传统絮刺拔罐组和滚针拔罐组总有效率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:传统絮刺拔罐法和滚针拔罐法均可改善颈型颈椎病患者的颈痛症状,提高颈椎的总体功能,且疗效相当。.

Keywords: bloodlettinga; cervical spondylosis of neck typea; pricking-cupping; rolling needlea; seven-star needlea.

Publication types

  • Randomized Controlled Trial

MeSH terms

  • Acupuncture Points
  • Acupuncture Therapy*
  • Cervical Vertebrae
  • Cupping Therapy
  • Humans
  • Spondylosis* / therapy
  • Treatment Outcome