摘要
目的 分析膝关节骨性关节炎应用运动疗法联合穴位敷贴的治疗效果。方法 70例膝关节骨性关节炎患者,依据干预方法不同分为联合干预组和常规干预组,各35例。常规干预组采用塞来昔布胶囊治疗,联合干预组采用运动疗法联合穴位敷贴治疗。比较两组中医证候积分、膝关节症状评分、膝关节活动度、膝关节功能、炎症指标、骨代谢指标、肌肉功能恢复情况、生活质量及临床疗效。结果 干预后,两组患者关节疼痛、关节肿胀、腰膝酸软、屈伸不利、活动受限、自汗盗汗、神疲乏力积分均低于干预前,且联合干预组均低于常规干预组(P<0.05)。干预后,两组患者晨僵、疼痛、日常活动能力评分和西安大略和麦克马斯特大学骨关节炎指数(WOMAC)总分及膝关节活动度均优于干预前,且联合干预组患者晨僵评分(2.74±0.47)分、疼痛评分(5.41±1.47)分、日常活动能力评分(30.11±5.13)分和WOMAC总分(38.26±3.30)分及膝关节活动度(75.53±2.96)°均优于常规干预组的(3.83±1.26)分、(8.77±1.85)分、(37.72±5.03)分、(50.32±7.72)分、(58.63±1.5)°(P<0.05)。干预后,两组美国特种外科医院(HSS)评分均高于干预前,且联合干预组HSS评分(72.63±8.43)分高于常规干预组的(65.34±7.85)分(P<0.05)。干预后,两组患者超敏C反应蛋白(hs-CRP)、超氧化物歧化酶(SOD)、肿瘤坏死因子-α(TNF-α)、白细胞介素(IL)-1β、IL-6、IL-10、IL-17均优于干预前,且联合干预组均优于常规干预组(P<0.05)。干预后,两组骨钙素(BGP)、25-羟维生素D3(25-OH-D3)、骨碱性磷酸酶(BALP)、抗酒石酸酸性磷酸酶5b(TRACP-5b)水平均优于干预前,且联合干预组均优于常规干预组(P<0.05)。干预后,两组肌肉骨骼功能评分简表(SMFA)评分均低于干预前,且联合干预组SMFA评分(23.12±3.63)分低于常规干预组的(35.08±4.02)分(P<0.05)。干预后,两组患者躯体、症状、影响、社会、工作评分及�
Objective To analyze the therapeutic effect of exercise therapy combined with acupoint application on knee osteoarthritis.Methods A retrospective selection was conducted on 70 patients with knee osteoarthritis.According to different intervention method,they were divided into a combined intervention group and a conventional intervention group,with 35 cases in each group.The conventional intervention group was treated with celecoxib capsule,and the combined intervention group was treated with exercise therapy combined with acupoint application.Both groups were compared in terms of traditional Chinese medicine syndrome score,knee symptom score,knee range of motion,knee joint function,inflammatory indicators,bone metabolic markers,muscle function recovery,quality of life and clinical efficacy.Results After the intervention,the scores of joint pain,joint swelling,lower back and knee soreness,poor flexion and extension,limited mobility,spontaneous sweating and night sweating,and fatigue in both groups were all lower than those before the intervention,and the combined intervention group was lower than the conventional intervention group(P<0.05).After the intervention,the Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index(WOMAC) for morning stiffness,pain,daily activity,total WOMAC score and knee range of motion in both groups were all better than those before the intervention;in the combined intervention group,the morning stiffness score was(2.74±0.47) points,the pain score was(5.41±1.47) points,the daily activity score was(30.11±5.13) points,the total WOMAC score was(38.26±3.30) points and the knee range of motion was(75.53±2.96)°,which were better than(3.83±1.26) points,(8.77±1.85) points,(37.72±5.03) points,(50.32±7.72) points and(58.63±1.5)° in the conventional intervention group(P<0.05).After the intervention,the HSS score in both groups was higher than that before the intervention,and the HSS score of(72.63±8.43) points in the combined intervention group was higher than(65.34±7.85) points i
作者
刘裕梅
LIU Yu-mei(Department of Joint Surgery,Yudu County People's Hospital,Ganzhou 342300,China)
出处
《中国现代药物应用》
2024年第17期22-26,共5页
Chinese Journal of Modern Drug Application
关键词
膝关节骨性关节炎
运动疗法
穴位贴敷
功能恢复
生活质量
Knee osteoarthritis
Exercise therapy
Acupoint application
Functional recovery
Quality of life
