侧卧交叉按压微调法治疗颈性眩晕的临床研究

摘要

Objective:To observe,compare and assess the clinical effect of treating cervical spondylosis of vertebral artery type by the method of micro-regulating with vertical cross pressing lying on one side and traditional Chinese massage method.Methods:One hundred and fifty six patients of Cervical spondylosis of vertebral artery type were selected and separated into micro-regulating pressing group and traditional Chinese massage group.Two groups’clinical effect was assessed,analyzed and compared using the general clinical evaluation method and improved .Results:The total effec-tive rate of micro-regulating pressing group and traditional Chinese massage group was 83.12% and 93.67% (including curative, excellent and effective),the cure rate was 15.58% and 30.38%.In two groups,the difference of the effective rate and the cure rate was statistically significant(P <0.05 );evaluating scale method of the symptoms and function showed that both treatment methods could improve distinctly CSA patients’symptoms like dizziness,neck and shoulder pain,daily life and work related as well as psychological and social adaptability (P <0.01);in micro-regulating pressing group the improvement of dizziness,daily life and work related as well as psychological and social adaptability was more significant (P <0.01)compared with traditional Chinese massage method (P <0.05)while there was no distinct difference for improving the pain of neck,shoulder and headache. Conclusion:Both micro-regulating with vertical cross pressing lying on one side and traditional Chinese massage method are dis-tinctively effective in improving various types of symptoms of CSA and the method of micro-regulating with vertical cross pressing lying on one side is more effective.%目的：对侧卧交叉按压微调法与传统推拿方法治疗椎动脉型颈椎病（Cervical Spandylosis of Vertebral Arterytype， CSA）的临床疗效进行观察、比较及评价。方法：选取156名 CSA 患者，并将其随机分为传统推拿组和按压微调组。将2组治疗前后的临床疗效分别使用通用的临床评定方法和改良《颈性眩晕症状与功能评估量表》法进行评估比较、分析。结果：传统推拿组及按压微调组总有效率（包括痊愈、显效、有效）分别为83.12％和93.67％，痊愈率分别为：15.58％和30.38％，2组总有效率及痊愈率差异均有统计学意义（P ＜0.05）；量表评估方法显示：2组治疗方法均可显著改善 CSA 患者眩晕、颈肩痛、头痛、日常生活及工作、心理及社会适应等症状（P ＜0.01），而按压微调组较传统推拿组对于改善眩晕、日常生活及工作、心理及社会适应等症状更为显著（P ＜0.01，P ＜0.05），对于颈肩痛及头痛症状改善无显著作用（P ＞0.05）。结论：传统推拿方法及侧卧交叉按压微调法对于改善 CSA 的各种症状均有显著疗效，且侧卧交叉按压微调法疗效尤为显著。