OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy differences between manual acupuncture (MA) and electroacupuncture (EA) in the treatment of hemiplegia after acute ischemic stroke. METHODS:Sixty-eight patients of hemiplegia after acute ischemic stroke were randomized into a MA group (34 cases) and an EA group (34 cases). The routine western medication and bilateral Dingnieqianxiexian (MS 6) were adopted in the two groups. The needles were retained for 30 min. In the MA group, the even-needling technique was used for 3 times during the needle retaining, 1 min each time. In the EA group, on the basis of manual stimulation, EA therapy was added, with disperse-dense wave, 5 Hz/20 Hz. The treatment was given once every day, 6 treatments a week, totally for 2 weeks. US National Institutes of Health stroke scale (NIHSS) score, the simplified Fugl-Meyer motor function (FMA) score and Barthel index (BI) were observed before and after treatment in the two groups. The clinical efficacy was compared between the two groups. RESULTS:NIHSS score was reduced apparently after treatment in the two groups (both P<0.01). The score in the EA group was lower than that in the MA group (P<0.05). After treatment, FMA score and BI score were all increased apparently in the two groups (all P<0.01) and the scores in the EA group were higher than those in the MA group (both P<0.01). The total effective rate was 94.1% (32/34) in the EA group and was 85.3% (29/34) in the MA group. The efficacy in the EA group was better than that in the MA group (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: EA acts on the rehabilitative effect on nerve defect function in the patients of hemiplegia after acute ischemic stroke. It improves limb motor function and the ability ofdaily life activity. The efficacy is better than that of MA.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy differences between manual acupuncture (MA) and electroacupuncture (EA) in the treatment of hemiplegia after acute ischemic stroke. METHODS: Sixty-eight patients of hemiplegia after acute ischemic stroke were randomized into a MA group (34 cases) and an EA group (34 cases). The routine western medication and bilateral Dingnieqianxiexian (MS 6) were adopted in the two groups. The needles were retained for 30 min. In the MA group, the even-needling technique was used for 3 times during the needle retaining, 1 min each time. In the EA group, on the basis of manual stimulation, EA therapy was added, with disperse-dense wave, 5 Hz/20 Hz. The treatment was given once every day, 6 treatments a week, totally for 2 weeks. US National Institutes of Health stroke scale (NIHSS) score, the simplified Fugl-Meyer motor function (FMA) score and Barthel index (BI) were observed before and after treatment in the two groups. The clinical efficacy was compared between the two groups. RESULTS: NIHSS score was reduced apparently after treatment in the two groups (both P<0.01). The score in the EA group was lower than that in the MA group (P<0.05). After treatment, FMA score and BI score were all increased apparently in the two groups (all P<0.01) and the scores in the EA group were higher than those in the MA group (both P<0.01). The total effective rate was 94.1% (32/34) in the EA group and was 85.3% (29/34) in the MA group. The efficacy in the EA group was better than that in the MA group (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: EA acts on the rehabilitative effect on nerve defect function in the patients of hemiplegia after acute ischemic stroke. It improves limb motor function and the ability ofdaily life activity. The efficacy is better than that of MA.