首页> 外文期刊>Medicine. >Comparing complementary alternative treatment for chronic shoulder pain of myofascial origin: Collateral meridian therapy versus local tender area-related meridians therapy
【24h】

Comparing complementary alternative treatment for chronic shoulder pain of myofascial origin: Collateral meridian therapy versus local tender area-related meridians therapy

机译:比较肌筋膜源性慢性肩痛的替代治疗:侧支经络疗法与局部压痛相关的经络疗法

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The aim of this study was to compare the short-term outcomes between 2 different treatments for unilateral chronic shoulder pain of myofascial origin, that is, local tender area related meridians (LTARMs) treatment and collateral meridian therapy (CMT), which were performed 6 times over a period of 4 weeks.Seventy patients with unilateral shoulder pain of chronic myofascial origin were enrolled. The patients were randomly assigned to 2 different treatment groups: 1 group received CMT (n=35) and the other received LTARM (n=35). Before and after the 2 treatment processes, all patients rated their overall pain intensity on a visual analogue scale (VAS) and a validated 13-question shoulder pain and disability index (SPADI) questionnaire was used to measure shoulder pain and functional impairment after therapy for 4 weeks.After CMT, the pain intensity was reduced after CMT. VAS score is reduced from 5.902.07 (a mean of 5.90 and standard deviation of 2.07) to 3.39 +/- 1.2. This was verified by the SPADI pain subscale scores (from 0.58 +/- 0.193 to 0.33 +/- 0.14). The pain-relief effect of CMT was significantly better than that of LTARM (VAS score from 5.78 +/- 1.64 to 4.58 +/- 1.40; P<0.005; SPADI pain subscale score from 0.58 +/- 0.16 to 0.45 +/- 0.14, P<0.001). In addition, the VAS scores of patients changed considerably in the CMT group after 4 weeks of treatment, where 63% of patients felt no or mild pain, whereas the VAS scores for moderate pain were even higher in the LTARM group in 75% of patients (P<0.001). Moreover, the SPADI disability subscale scores improved significantly in the CMT group because of their greater mobility associated with shoulder impairment (disability score: from 0.58 +/- 0.20 to 0.35 +/- 0.14) than those in the LTARM group (disability score: from 0.55 +/- 0.17 to 0.44 +/- 0.14, P<0.001).CMT may be more effective in reducing chronic shoulder pain of myofascial origin than the LTARM treatment, where treatment with the former resulted in better functional recovery after 4 weeks than the latter.
机译:这项研究的目的是比较两种针对肌筋膜源性单侧慢性肩痛的不同治疗方法(即局部压痛区相关经络(LTARMs)治疗和经络经络治疗(CMT))的两种短期治疗方法的短期疗效,这些治疗方法分别为6在4周的时间内进行了2次重复性研究。共入选了70例慢性肌筋膜源性单侧肩痛患者。将患者随机分为2个不同的治疗组:1组接受CMT(n = 35),另一组接受LTARM(n = 35)。在2种治疗过程之前和之后,所有患者均以视觉模拟量表(VAS)对他们的总体疼痛强度进行评分,并使用经过验证的13个问题的肩痛和残疾指数(SPADI)问卷来测量治疗后的肩痛和功能障碍CMT后4周,CMT后疼痛强度减轻。 VAS分数从5.902.07(平均值为5.90,标准偏差为2.07)降低到3.39 +/- 1.2。 SPADI疼痛分量表评分(从0.58 +/- 0.193到0.33 +/- 0.14)证实了这一点。 CMT的缓解疼痛效果明显优于LTARM(VAS评分从5.78 +/- 1.64到4.58 +/- 1.40; P <0.005; SPADI疼痛分量表评分从0.58 +/- 0.16到0.45 +/- 0.14 ,P <0.001)。此外,在治疗4周后,CMT组患者的VAS评分有显着变化,其中63%的患者没有感到或轻度疼痛,而LTARM组的中度疼痛的VAS评分在75%的患者中甚至更高。 (P <0.001)。此外,CADI组的SPADI残疾子量表评分显着改善,因为与肩关节损伤相关的活动能力(残疾评分:从0.58 +/- 0.20到0.35 +/- 0.14)要比LTARM组(残疾评分:从0.55 +/- 0.17至0.44 +/- 0.14,P <0.001).CMT可能比LTARM治疗更有效地减轻肌筋膜源性慢性肩痛,后者治疗4周后的功能恢复优于LTARM治疗。后者。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号