牵引后推拿与单纯牵引治疗腰椎间盘突出症的疗效评价  

Therapeutic Evaluation on PLID with Traction Combining with Tuina and Traction Simply

作　　者：张建平[1] 赵建平[1] 周健[1] 

机构地区：[1]台州市第一人民医院,浙江台州318020

出　　处：《中华中医药学刊》2009年第11期2419-2420,共2页Chinese Archives of Traditional Chinese Medicine

基　　金：台州市科技局资助项目(081KY32)

摘　　要：目的:对比牵引后推拿与单纯牵引的疗效。方法:单纯牵引治疗组63例,使用3FT-600型腰椎自动牵引床行间歇牵引;牵引后配合斜扳、牵抖手法治疗组63例,针对腰椎间盘突出症施行牵引后推拿,治疗6周后评定疗效。结果:在6周后单纯牵引组总有效率为57.154%,牵引后推拿组总有效率为85.71%,两组有显著性差异(P<0.05)。结论:牵引后推拿较单纯牵引疗效佳。Objective： To evaluate the therapeutic effect of prolapse of lumbar intervertebral disc（PLID） with traction combining with Tuina, comparing to traction simply. Methods： 126 eases of PLID were randomly allocated into treatment group of traction combining with Tuina and control group of traction simply. The traction was performed intermittently by the lumber vertebral automatic traction bed of 3F T -600 model. Based on traction, obliquely pulling and shaking manip- ulations were performed in the treatment group. The scores of therapeutic effect on PLID were evaluated and analyzed be- fore and after the treatment. Results ： The difference of scores between the two groups before the treatment was not statisti- cally significant （ P 〉 0.05 ）, but was of statistical significance after the treatment （ P 〈 0.01 ）. Compared to the group of traction simply, the group of traction combining with Tuina were better at improving the function of PLID. The scores after the treatment of both groups were markedly higher than before（ P 〈 0.01 ）. Conclusion： On the treatment of PLID, the group of traction combining with traction were better than the group of traction simply.

关 键 词：手法 牵引 腰椎间盘突出症 

分 类 号：R681.53[医药卫生—骨科学]