【摘要】：目的:本項(xiàng)課題旨在通過(guò)五點(diǎn)支撐法治療胸腰椎壓縮性骨折的80例臨床觀察,確定五點(diǎn)支撐法在治療胸腰椎壓縮性骨折方面的作用,并對(duì)研究的科學(xué)性進(jìn)行數(shù)據(jù)評(píng)估。方法:采用Doll's臨床病例隨機(jī)表法80例入組患者分為2組,五點(diǎn)支撐法組(治療組)和墊枕法組(對(duì)照組),兩組患者均指導(dǎo)其進(jìn)行相應(yīng)的保守治療方法并配合中藥外敷,以14天為一個(gè)周期,連續(xù)治療2個(gè)周期。采用VAS評(píng)分以及腰椎壓縮性骨折患者Oswestry功能障礙指數(shù)問(wèn)卷為評(píng)價(jià)手段,詳細(xì)記錄治療前后患者癥狀以及基本生活情況。實(shí)驗(yàn)結(jié)果:1、五點(diǎn)支撐法在緩解患者疼痛癥狀方面的效果要明顯優(yōu)于墊枕法(P0.05)。2、在80例臨床觀察中針對(duì)治療后患者椎體的活動(dòng)即屈伸、旋轉(zhuǎn)功能等情況,與墊枕法治療效果存在顯著性差異,表明五點(diǎn)支撐法在改善患者椎體活動(dòng)范圍上具有明顯療效。3、在改善生活質(zhì)量方面,五點(diǎn)支撐法對(duì)于患者生活質(zhì)量的影響要優(yōu)于頸墊枕法(P0.05),對(duì)臨床各項(xiàng)治療的研究發(fā)現(xiàn),患者的生活治療與疼痛以及活動(dòng)情況有密切關(guān)系,當(dāng)患者疼痛與功能均得到明顯改善是,對(duì)治療效果更滿意。4、對(duì)于椎體骨折復(fù)位高度的評(píng)價(jià),由于在觀察療程過(guò)程中無(wú)法迅速完成椎體骨折復(fù)位,或者復(fù)位高度無(wú)法達(dá)到參考值,所以無(wú)法對(duì)復(fù)位高度進(jìn)行有效的分析。5、對(duì)在臨床觀察結(jié)果分析發(fā)現(xiàn),五點(diǎn)支撐法的整體有效率為90.00%,墊枕法的有效率為87.50%,兩者之間存在差異,表明在整體治療過(guò)程中,五點(diǎn)支撐法與墊枕法相比療效相當(dāng),從而驗(yàn)證了五點(diǎn)支撐法的臨床療效。結(jié)論:五點(diǎn)支撐法在治療胸腰椎壓縮性骨折的療效顯著,尤其在改善生活質(zhì)量及改善椎體活動(dòng)方面更為突出。為臨床上保守治療壓縮性骨折提供理論依據(jù)。
[Abstract]:Aim: to determine the effect of five-point support in the treatment of thoracolumbar vertebral compression fracture and to evaluate the scientific nature of the study by clinical observation of 80 cases of thoracolumbar vertebral compression fracture treated by five-point support method. Methods: 80 patients with Doll's were randomly divided into two groups: five-point support group (treatment group) and pillow-cushion group (control group). The patients in both groups were instructed to carry out the corresponding conservative treatment and combined with external application of traditional Chinese medicine, and the patients in the two groups were divided into two groups: the treatment group (control group) and the control group (control group). 14 days as a cycle, continuous treatment for 2 cycles. The symptoms and basic living conditions of patients with lumbar compression fracture before and after treatment were recorded by VAS score and Oswestry dysfunction index questionnaire. The results were as follows: 1. The effect of five-point support method on relieving pain symptoms of patients was significantly better than that of pillow-cushion method (P0.05). 2. In 80 cases of clinical observation, the patients' vertebral body movement, such as flexion and extension, rotation function and so on, were observed. The results showed that the five-point support method had a significant effect on improving the range of vertebral body movement. 3, in improving the quality of life, the results showed that the five-point support method was effective in improving the quality of life of the patients. The effect of five-point support method on patients' quality of life was better than that of neck-cushion method (P0.05). The study of clinical treatment found that patients' life therapy was closely related to pain and activity. When the pain and function of the patients were significantly improved, the therapeutic effect was more satisfactory. 4. For the evaluation of the height of reduction of vertebral body fracture, the reduction of vertebral body fracture could not be completed quickly during the observation course of treatment. Or the reduction height could not reach the reference value, so the reduction height could not be effectively analyzed. 5. According to the analysis of the clinical observation results, the overall effective rate of the five-point support method was 90.00%, and the effective rate of the pillow-cushion method was 87.50%. There are differences between the two methods, indicating that the five-point support method has the same curative effect as the pillow-cushion method in the whole treatment process, thus validating the clinical curative effect of the five-point support method. Conclusion: five-point support is effective in the treatment of thoracolumbar vertebral compression fracture, especially in improving the quality of life and vertebral body activity. It provides theoretical basis for conservative treatment of compression fracture.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：長(zhǎng)春中醫(yī)藥大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2016
【分類號(hào)】：R274.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王彬;林松青;尤志強(qiáng);陳肖;謝增軍;溫清波;;兩種方法治療胸腰椎壓縮性骨折的對(duì)比分析[J];中國(guó)中醫(yī)骨傷科雜志;2015年08期

2 楊棟;鄭志良;陳逸明;;3種方法治療老年胸腰椎壓縮性骨折的療效比較[J];南昌大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(醫(yī)學(xué)版);2014年10期

3 鄒煥汶;;中醫(yī)保守治療單純胸腰椎壓縮性骨折臨床觀察[J];遼寧中醫(yī)雜志;2014年05期

4 徐文銘;彭力平;余闐;劉曉玲;徐倩;;復(fù)位床托快速?gòu)?fù)位法和經(jīng)皮穿刺椎體成形術(shù)治療胸腰椎壓縮性骨折的臨床療效對(duì)比[J];中國(guó)現(xiàn)代醫(yī)生;2014年12期

5 敖學(xué)艷;祖明旭;;電針、穴位注射結(jié)合西藥治療胸腰椎壓縮性骨折臨床療效觀察[J];世界中西醫(yī)結(jié)合雜志;2014年03期

6 胡小軍;高秀紅;;梅花針點(diǎn)刺放血配合骨肽穴位注射治療單純性胸腰椎壓縮性骨折86例[J];中國(guó)社區(qū)醫(yī)師;2013年24期

7 劉文剛;許學(xué)猛;趙傳喜;謝國(guó)平;吳淮;魏凌峰;魯海;;單側(cè)椎體成形術(shù)配合補(bǔ)腎強(qiáng)筋膠囊治療老年胸腰椎壓縮性骨折臨床研究[J];中醫(yī)學(xué)報(bào);2013年10期

8 曹賀;邵萍;劉笑迎;;電針夾脊穴輔助中老年胸腰椎骨折功能康復(fù)效果觀察[J];人民軍醫(yī);2013年04期

9 鄭建河;陳歌海;林惠華;張育斌;;單側(cè)與雙側(cè)PKP治療骨質(zhì)疏松性胸腰椎壓縮性骨折療效對(duì)比[J];中國(guó)骨與關(guān)節(jié)損傷雜志;2011年11期

10 印紅兵;;過(guò)伸復(fù)位加腰椎牽引法治療胸腰椎壓縮性骨折38例[J];黑龍江中醫(yī)藥;2011年05期

，

本文編號(hào)：2460218