“三焦针法”治疗血管性痴呆的临床疗效研究

Study on clinical efficacy of “triple energizer acupuncture method” on vascular dementia

关键词:  针刺  血管性痴呆  三焦针法  认知功能  行为能力

Key words:  acupuncture point  vascular dementia  triple energizer acupuncture method  cognitive function  behavior ability

摘要:

[目的] 观察"三焦针法"治疗血管性痴呆的临床疗效。[方法] 将符合条件的86例血管性痴呆患者随机分为观察组及对照组每组43例，在内科治疗的基础上，观察组采用"三焦针法"治疗，对照组采用传统针刺法治疗，分别于治疗前和治疗12周后，以简易精神状态检查表（MMSE）、日常生活自理能力量表（ADL）进行疗效评价，比较两组间的疗效差异。[结果] 1）入院前两组患者在性别、年龄、受教育情况、病程及类型等基线水平上无统计学差异（P>0.05）。2）各组患者治疗后与治疗前相比，MMSE评分均有所升高，观察组明显优于对照组（P<0.05）。3）各组患者治疗后与治疗前相比，ADL评分均有所改善（P<0.05），但观察组患者与对照组相比ADL评分无显著性差异（P>0.05）。[结论] "三焦针法"治疗血管性痴呆具有肯定的临床疗效，能改善患者的认知功能及行为能力，且疗效优于传统针刺法。

Abstract:

[Objective] To observe the clinical efficacy of "triple energizer acupuncture method" on vascular dementia. [Methods] The 86 eligible vascular dementia patients were randomly divided into two groups, such as "triple energizer acupuncture method" group and control group,Every group contained 43 cases, the observation group used "triple energizer acupuncture method" while the control group treated with conventional acupuncture point treatment. The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Activity of Daily Living Scale (ADL) were used respectively before treatment and after 12 weeks of treatment, to evaluate the efficacy and conduct comparison on the difference between the two groups. [Results] 1)Before treatment, there was no significant different about the basic line (such as age, sex) of these patients(P>0.05). 2)Patients were compared before and after treatment, MMSE scores higher, the observation group was significantly better than the control group (P<0.05). 3) The ADL scores were improved in each group compared with those before treatment (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference in ADL score between the observation group and the control group (P>0.05). [Conclusion] "Triple energizer acupuncture method" has a definite clinical efficacyon the treatment of vascular dementia, can improve patients' cognitive function and behaviorability. And the efficacy is better than the traditional acupuncture point method.