论文部分内容阅读
Objective: To compare whether there is clinical effects difference between intradermal needle at auricular acupoint and conventional acupuncture for insomnia.Methods: A total of 70 patients were randomly assigned into an intradermal needle group and an acupuncture group,35 patients in each group.Finally 34 patients completed the study in the intradermal group,32 patients completed validly in the acupuncture group.The patients in the intradermal needle group received intradermal needle therapy,in which the needle was imbedded subcutaneously at auricular acupoint: Shénmén(神门 TF4),Pízhìxià (皮质下 AT4),Zhěn(枕 AT3),Xīn (心 CO15),and back-shu point: Gānshū(肝俞 BL18),Xīnshū(心俞 BL15),Shènshū (肾俞 BL23) and Pǐshū(脾俞 BL20),as well as (A)nmián (安眠 EX-HN18) retained for 2 days,and the patient would received a second therapy every other day,one course of treatment consisted of 3 times of treatment.The patients in the acupuncture group received a conventional acupuncture therapy,in which Zhàohǎi (照海 KI6),Shēnmài (申脉 BL62),Shénmén (神门 HT7),Sānyīnjiāo(三阴交 SP6),EX-HN18,Sìshéncōng (四神聪 EX-HN1) were punctured conventionally with needle and the needle was retained for 30 min,once per day,one course of treatment consisted of 5 times of treatment.Before and after the4 courses of treatment,Pittsburgh sleep quality index (PSQI) of the patients in the two groups were evaluated,and their clinical therapeutic effects were evaluated too.Results: There were no statistically significant differences of PSQI scores and clinical therapeutic effects of the patients with insomnia in two groups after treatment (both P＞0.05).Conclusions: Intradermal needle at auricular acupoint and conventional acupuncture therapy have comparable clinical therapeutic effects.