-
颈椎病是成年人的常见疾病,高发群体包括中老年、长时间伏案工作者等,因炎症、劳损等原因导致颈椎椎间盘、椎体及附属结构的退行性病变。神经根型颈椎病在颈椎病中占比约60%,其因颈椎退行性病变造成神经根压迫、刺激,进而出现水肿、炎症、粘连等,出现颈、背、上肢疼痛、麻木、无力等症状[1]。首选治疗方案是神经根型颈椎病(cervical spondylotic radiculopathy,CSR),初步诊断病人选择非手术治疗,包括药物、牵引、推拿等能够取得一定的临床疗效。但新的观点认为,颈椎牵引虽然在调节关节排列、改善疼痛及不适方面疗效明显,但短期内颈椎生物力学平衡不能完全恢复,可能影响临床疗效[2]。Mulligan手法是近年来用于CSR的热门手法治疗方案,我们认为将其与电动牵引联合运用,既能够调节关节排列还能改善因退变造成的关节突关节间、钩椎关节紊乱,减轻炎症反应[3]。进一步明确手法治疗联合电动牵引治疗CSR的疗效,本研究纳入88例CSR病人进行前瞻性对照试验。现作报道。
-
治疗前2组VAS评分、CASCS评分和NDI差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。治疗后2组CASCS评分明显升高,VAS评分和NDI均明显降低(P < 0.01);且观察组CASCS评分明显高于对照组,VAS评分和NDI均明显低于对照组(P < 0.01)(见表 1)。
分组 VAS评分/分 CASCS评分/分 NDI 治疗前 对照组 5.54±0.40 43.63±5.39 67.09±7.20 观察组 5.52±0.31 43.41±5.41 66.32±7.12 t 0.26 0.19 0.50 P >0.05 >0.05 >0.05 治疗后 对照组 2.14±0.30△△ 76.32±5.22△△ 30.39±3.88△△ 观察组 1.86±0.22△△ 88.47±6.82△△ 24.76±3.44△△ t 4.99 9.38 7.20 P < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 组内配对t检验:△△P < 0.01 表 1 2组功能指标比较(ni=44;x±s)
-
治疗前2组颈椎右旋、左旋角度差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);治疗后2组颈椎右旋、左旋角度均明显增加(P < 0.01),且观察组颈椎右旋、左旋角度均明显大于对照组(P < 0.01)(见表 2)。
分组 右旋/(°) 左旋/(°) 治疗前 对照组 52.24±4.40 53.13±5.30 观察组 52.12±4.34 53.01±5.32 t 0.13 0.11 P >0.05 >0.05 治疗后 对照组 65.18±3.90△△ 66.08±4.12△△ 观察组 71.88±3.66△△ 70.98±6.82△△ t 8.31 4.08 P < 0.01 < 0.01 组内配对t检验:△△P < 0.01 表 2 2组颈椎右旋、左旋角度比较(ni=44;x±s)
-
观察组治疗总有效率为95.45%,略高于对照组的81.82%,但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)(见表 3)。
分组 n 治愈 显效 有效 无效 总有效率/% 观察组 44 10 20 12 2 95.45 对照组 44 8 18 10 8 81.82 χ2 — 1.20△ 2.20 P — >0.05 >0.05 △示uc值 表 3 2组综合疗效比较(n)
-
病人男,56岁,右侧颈肩部疼痛,上肢放射痛、乏力、麻木,确诊为神经根型颈椎病(见图 1A),采用手法治疗联合电动牵引治疗,治疗4周后颈肩疼痛大幅缓解,上肢症状消失(见图 1B)。
手法治疗联合电动牵引治疗神经根型颈椎病的疗效分析
Effect analysis of manual therapy combined with electric traction in the treatment of cervical spondylotic radiculopathy
-
摘要:
目的探究手法治疗联合电动牵引治疗神经根型颈椎病(CSR)的临床疗效。 方法选取88例CSR病人,采用数字表随机分为观察组和对照组,各44例。对照组采用常规电动牵引治疗,观察组在此基础上联合Mulligan手法治疗,共治疗4周。比较治疗前后疼痛视觉模拟(VAS)评分、颈椎功能障碍指数(NDI)及颈椎病临床评价量表(CASCS)评分,测量治疗前后颈椎右旋、左旋角度,评价治疗4周后的综合疗效。 结果治疗后2组CASCS评分明显升高,VAS评分和NDI均明显降低(P < 0.01);且观察组CASCS评分明显高于对照组,VAS评分和NDI均明显低于对照组(P < 0.01)。治疗后2组颈椎右旋、左旋角度均明显增加(P < 0.01),且观察组颈椎右旋、左旋角度均明显大于对照组(P < 0.01)。观察组治疗总有效率为95.45%,略高于对照组的81.82%,但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。 结论在传统电动牵引治疗治疗CSR的基础上开展Mulligan手法治疗能有效改善病人疼痛、眩晕及功能障碍等,提升颈椎活动度。该手法见效快、操作简单,适用于CSR的物理治疗。 -
关键词:
- 神经根型颈椎病 /
- Mulligan手法治疗 /
- 电动牵引
Abstract:ObjectiveTo explore the curative effects of manual therapy combined with electric traction in the treatment of cervical spondylotic radiculopathy(CSR). MethodsEighty-eight patients with CSR were randomly divided into the observation group and control group using number table method(44 cases in each group).The control group was treated with conventional electric traction, and the observation group was treated with Mulligan manual therapy based on the control group for 4 weeks.The pain visual analogue(VAS)score, neck disability index(NDI)and clinical assessment scale cervical spondylosis(CASCS)score in two groups were compared between before and after treatment.The right and left rotation angles of the cervical spine in two groups were measured before and after treatment.The comprehensive curative effects in two groups after 4 weeks of treatment were evaluated. ResultsAfter treatment, the CASCS score significantly increased, and the VAS score and NDI significantly decreased in two groups(P < 0.01).After treatment, the CASCS score in observation group was higher than that in control group, and the VAS score and NDI in observation group were significantly lower than those in control group(P < 0.01).After treatment, the right and left rotation angles of the cervical spine in two groups significantly increased, and the right and left rotation angles in observation group were significantly larger than those in control group(P < 0.01).The total effective rates in the observation group and control group were 95.45% and 81.82%, respectively, but and the difference of which was not statistically significant(P>0.05). ConclusionsThe Mulligan technique manual therapy based on traditional electric traction for CSR can effectively improve the pain, dizziness and dysfunction, and improve cervical vertebra activity.This method is quick and easy to operate, and suitable for physical therapy of CSR. -
表 1 2组功能指标比较(ni=44;x±s)
分组 VAS评分/分 CASCS评分/分 NDI 治疗前 对照组 5.54±0.40 43.63±5.39 67.09±7.20 观察组 5.52±0.31 43.41±5.41 66.32±7.12 t 0.26 0.19 0.50 P >0.05 >0.05 >0.05 治疗后 对照组 2.14±0.30△△ 76.32±5.22△△ 30.39±3.88△△ 观察组 1.86±0.22△△ 88.47±6.82△△ 24.76±3.44△△ t 4.99 9.38 7.20 P < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 组内配对t检验:△△P < 0.01 表 2 2组颈椎右旋、左旋角度比较(ni=44;x±s)
分组 右旋/(°) 左旋/(°) 治疗前 对照组 52.24±4.40 53.13±5.30 观察组 52.12±4.34 53.01±5.32 t 0.13 0.11 P >0.05 >0.05 治疗后 对照组 65.18±3.90△△ 66.08±4.12△△ 观察组 71.88±3.66△△ 70.98±6.82△△ t 8.31 4.08 P < 0.01 < 0.01 组内配对t检验:△△P < 0.01 表 3 2组综合疗效比较(n)
分组 n 治愈 显效 有效 无效 总有效率/% 观察组 44 10 20 12 2 95.45 对照组 44 8 18 10 8 81.82 χ2 — 1.20△ 2.20 P — >0.05 >0.05 △示uc值 -
[1] 罗晓, 刘康, 杨维新. 某医院2014-2016年颈椎病住院患者流行病学现状分析[J]. 解放军预防医学杂志, 2018, 36(1): 124. [2] 欧国峰, 董博, 刘继华, 等. 神经根型颈椎病的中西医治疗进展[J]. 现代中西医结合杂志, 2017, 26(7): 791. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-8849.2017.07.039 [3] 仇大鹏, 朱勋兵, 李徽徽, 等. 肿瘤坏死因子-α和白细胞介素-1β在脊髓型颈椎病中的表达及相关性研究[J]. 蚌埠医学院学报, 2018, 43(7): 841. [4] 中华外科杂志编辑部. 颈椎病的分型、诊断及非手术治疗专家共识(2018)[J]. 中华外科杂志, 2018, 56(6): 401. [5] 黄娟, 赵凯. 青年颈椎病牵引治疗的对照研究[J]. 中国康复医学杂志, 2016, 31(6): 674. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-1242.2016.06.012 [6] 唐曦, 殷坚, 韩国栋, 等. 针刺配合肌内效贴贴扎疗法治疗颈型颈椎病疗效观察[J]. 湖南中医药大学学报, 2017, 37(1): 70. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-070X.2017.01.018 [7] KOS D, RAEYMAEKERS J, REMOORTEL AV.Electronic visual analogue scales for pain, fatigue, anxiety and quality of life in people with multiple sclerosis using smartphone and tablet a reliability and feasibility study[J]. Clin Rehabil, 2017, 31(9): 1215. doi: 10.1177/0269215517692641 [8] PAVEL G LINDBERG, SANCHEZ K, Ozcan F, et al. Correlation of force control with regional spinal DTI in patients with cervical spondylosis without signs of spinal cord injury on conventional MRI[J]. Eur Radiol, 2016, 26(3): 733. doi: 10.1007/s00330-015-3876-z [9] SUN W, ZHENG K, LIU B, et al. Neuroprotective potential of gentongping in rat model of cervical spondylotic radiculopathy targeting ppar-γ pathway[J]. J Immunol Res, 2017, 2017(2): 1. [10] 黄莉华, 白跃宏, 马峥, 等. 非手术脊柱减压系统治疗神经根型颈椎病的疗效分析及复发率研究[J]. 颈腰痛杂志, 2017, 38(1): 60. [11] 苏琦, 孙竞. 颈肌强度训练联合颈椎牵引对神经根型颈椎病患者颈部肌肉表面肌电信号的影响[J]. 颈腰痛杂志, 2018, 39(6): 812. [12] 黄俊能, 何育风. 手法与牵引对椎动脉型颈椎病疗效的Meta分析[J]. 湖南中医杂志, 2018, 34(8): 166. [13] 李水琴, 欧妍. 牵引联合颈椎关节松动术治疗神经根型颈椎病的疗效观察[J]. 中华物理医学与康复杂志, 2018, 40(1): 63. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0254-1424.2018.01.017 [14] YOON JR, KIM YK, KO YD, et al. Spinal accessory nerve injury induced by technique therapy: a case report[J]. Ann Rehabil Med, 2018, 42(5): 773. doi: 10.5535/arm.2018.42.5.773 [15] 白杨平, 罗伟初, 李翠芳, 等. 自锁式零切迹颈椎融合器治疗颈椎病的疗效观察[J]. 蚌埠医学院学报, 2018, 43(4): 100. [16] LIPKENS B, CHITALE KC, ROSSJOHNSRUD BP, et al. Macro-scale cell technique using bulk. ultrasonic standing waves for biopharmacy and cellular therapy applications[J]. J Acoust Soc Am, 2017, 141(5): 3504.