设为首页
加入收藏
联系我们
Email-Alert
 

    首页 | 杂志介绍 | 编委成员 | 投稿指南 | 订阅指南 | 过刊浏览 | 论著模板 | 综述模板 | 帮助

 
何明伟,刘 景,倪家骧,刘长信.阻滞联合手法复位治疗颈源性头痛的疗效分析[J].中国康复医学杂志,2012,27(7):621~624
阻滞联合手法复位治疗颈源性头痛的疗效分析    点此下载全文
何明伟  刘 景  倪家骧  刘长信
首都医科大学宣武医院疼痛科,100053
基金项目:
DOI:
摘要点击次数: 2889
全文下载次数: 2500
摘要:
      摘要 目的:探讨高位颈椎旁阻滞联合手法复位对颈源性头痛的治疗效果。 方法:40例颈源性头痛患者随机分为两组(A,n=20例;B,n=20例),A组接受颈2椎旁阻滞治疗,B组接受手法复位联合颈2椎旁阻滞治疗。比较治疗前后及不同治疗方法治疗后不同时间段,患者的轻、中度头痛天数、剧烈头痛的发作次数及服药剂量。 结果:A组接受治疗后1—2个月、3—4个月,患者的每月轻、中度头痛天数、剧烈头痛发作次数及口服非甾体类抗炎药物(NSAID)的剂量分别为:2.5±1.1d、1.0±0.30次、200±50mg/d和7.6±3.5d、1.6±0.4次、860±80mg/d均较治疗前2个月明显减少,差异有极显著意义(P<0.01);B组治疗后1—2个月、3—4个月的数据分别为:2.3±1.0d、1.2±0.45次、300±75mg/d和3.7±2.3d、1.0±0.33次、350±100mg/d,较治疗前2个月明显减少,差异有极显著意义(P<0.01);B组治疗后3—4个月,患者每月头痛天数、剧烈头痛发作次数及口服NSAID的剂量均较A组:7.6±3.5d、1.6±0.4次和860±80mg/d明显减少,差异有显著意义(P<0.05)。 结论:高位颈椎旁阻滞联合手法复位治疗颈源性头痛疗效优于单纯高位颈椎旁阻滞,但其远期疗效尚待探讨。
关键词:颈源性头痛  颈2椎旁阻滞  阻滞联合手法复位
A clinical study for the treatment of cervicogenic headache via upper cervical paravertebral block combined with manipulative reduction    Download Fulltext
Department of Pain Medicine, Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing,100053
Fund Project:
Abstract:
      Abstract Objective:To study the effect of upper cervical paravertebral block combined with manipulative reduction for the treatment of cervicogenic headache. Method: Forty patients suffered from cervicogenic headache, aged between 25 and 48 years were randomly divided into A and B groups (20 patients in each group). Group A received C2 paravertebral block treatment, group B received manual reduction combined with C2 paravertebral block. The pain score, severity of pain episode and the amount of medication before and after treatment were compared. Result: For group A, posttreatment 1—2 months and 3—4 months, the monthly days of mild and moderate headache, the number of severe headache episode, and the amount of oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs(NSAID) were 2.5±1.1d,1.0±0.30times,200±50mg/d and 7.6±3.5d,1.6±0.4times,860±80mg/d respectively;compared with 2 months pretreatment all reduced significantly(P<0.01). For group B, posttreatment 1—2 months and 3—4 months, the monthly days of mild and moderate headache, the number of severe headache episode, and the amount of oral NSAID were 2.3±1.0d,1.2±0.45times,300±75mg/d and 3.7±2.3d,1.0±0.33times,350±100mg/d respectively; compared with 2 months pretreatment all also reduced significantly(P<0.01). In group A posttreatment 3—4 months, the monthly days of mild and moderate headache, the number of severe headache episode, and the amount of oral NSAID were 7.6±3.5d,1.6±0.4times and 860±80mg/d respectively. There were significant difference between group B and group A posttreatment 3—4 months(P<0.05). Conclusion: For effects of the treatment of cervicogenic headache, upper cervical paravertebral block combined with manipulative reduction was better than the upper cervical paravertebral block alone, but its long-term effect needed to be further explore.
Keywords:cervicogenic headache  C2 paravertebral block  nerve block combined with manipulative reduction
查看全文  查看/发表评论

您是本站第 38006036 位访问者

版权所有:中国康复医学会
主管单位:中国科学技术协会 主办单位:中国康复医学会
地址:北京市朝阳区樱花园东街,中日友好医院内   邮政编码:100029   电话:010-64218095   

本系统由北京勤云科技发展有限公司设计
京ICP备18060696号-2

京公网安备 11010502038612号