针刺配合耳穴贴压治疗原发性痛经疗效观察

摘要

目的：运用随机对照研究方法比较针刺、耳穴贴压疗法及两者结合治疗原发性痛经的临床疗效差异,为临床治疗原发性痛经选出最佳治疗方法,并从中医护理角度探讨原发性痛经的常规护理。方法将90例原发性痛经患者随机分为针刺组30例(A组),耳穴贴压组30例(B组),针刺配合耳穴贴压组30例(C组),于患者月经来潮前7 d进行治疗,1个月经周期为1个疗程,分别治疗3个疗程。观察和比较3组患者疼痛症状积分及临床疗效的差异,进行统计分析。结果3组治疗后疼痛症状积分与本组治疗前比较差异均有统计学意义(P＜0.05),治疗后3组疼痛症状积分组间比较差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05),A组和C组优于B组(P＜0.05),C组优于A组(P＜0.05)。A组总有效率为96.7%,B组为93.3%,C组为100.0%,经等级资料多样本比较的秩和检验分析,Z=7.675,P=0.022(P＜0.05)。结论3种治疗方法都是治疗原发性痛经的有效方法,但针刺与耳穴结合治疗的效果最佳。%ObjectiveTo compare the clinical efficacies of acupuncture, auricular point sticking, and the combination of the two methods in treating primary dysmenorrhea by using randomized controlled method, for selecting the optimal treatment in treating primary dysmenorrhea, and to explore the nursing care method for primarydysmenorrhea from the perspective of Chinese medicine. MethodNinety patients with primary dysmenorrhea were randomized into an acupuncture group of 30 cases (group A), an auricular point sticking group of 30 cases (group B), and a combined group of acupuncture plus auricular point sticking of 30 cases (group C). The patients were given treatment 7 d ahead of the menstrual period, a menstrual cycle as a treatment course, totally for 3 courses. The pain score and clinical efficacies were observed and compared among the three groups for statistical analyses.Result The pain scores were significantly changed in the three groups after intervention (P<0.05), there were significant differences in comparing the pain scores among the three groups after intervention (P<0.05), group A and C were superior to group B (P<0.05), and group C was superior to group A (P<0.05). The total effective rate was 96.7% in group A, versus 93.3% in group B and 100.0%in group C, and the rank-sum test showed thatZ=7.675,P=0.022 (P<0.05).ConclusionThe three treatment methods are all effective in treating primary dysmenorrhea, while combining acupuncture and auricular point sticking can approach the optimal effect.