针灸和整脊联合治疗中风后遗症的临床研究
|
摘要
目的：
本临床实验采用随机对照研究,将80例中风后遗症患者按照随机分组原则分为2组,即对照组单纯采用传统针灸治疗,治疗组则采用针灸配合整脊疗法治疗,进行对比观察。7天为一个疗程,.以6个疗程为限,同时采用ADL评分、脑卒中后偏瘫恢复六阶段测评、FIM评分、SF-36评分、临床总体疗效评价标准以及神经功能缺损评价标准观察实验两组对中风后遗症的临床疗效,探讨其理论依据,以便更好地在临床上推广。
方法：
将符合入选标准的80例中风后遗症患者按照随机分组原则分为2组,即针灸配合整脊疗法组40例,传统针灸对照组40例,对照组采用单纯针灸治疗,针灸取穴采用醒脑调神,疏通经络的方法,以手厥阴经、督脉及足太阴经穴为主。治疗组则采用针灸配合整脊治疗：采用上述针灸治疗方法外,还配合整脊疗法。术者以左(右)手拇指顶住患者脊椎棘突,向对侧推按,分别采用分筋疏理、拿点摩揉等手法以舒筋活血。并随症加减：如患者口眼歪斜,加用收放法；语言不利,加拇指压法；血压升高,加扫散法；小便失禁,加用指拨法。每日一次,每次30分钟。疗程与针灸治疗组相同。两组都治疗每日一次,7天为一个疗程,间隔3天,以6个疗程为限,共计60天。同时采用ADL评分、脑卒中后偏瘫恢复六阶段测评、FIM评分、SF-36评分、临床总体疗效评价标准以及神经功能缺损评价标准观察实验两组对中风后遗症的临床疗效。
统计方法：分类资料用χ2检验,等级资料用两样本比较Wilcoxon秩和检验(校正),两样本均数比较用t检验或Wilcoxon秩和检验,自身前后比较用配对t检验或Wilcoxon配对秩和检验。
结果：
1.治疗前对照组与治疗组性别构成,年龄组成以及ADL评分、脑卒中后偏瘫恢复六阶段测评、FIM评分以及SF-36评分比较,p>0.05。
2.实验两组应用ADL评分的比较结果
经过独立样本T检验,T=-5.051(p=0.000),由于p<0.01,因此两组在实验后比较,ADL评分有显著性差异。治疗组显著优于对照组。对照组自身前后配对T检验显示,T=0.651(p=0.072),提示对照组自身实验前后比较,没有显著性差异。治疗组自身前后配对T检验显示,T=-6.002(p=0.000),由于p<0.01,提示在实验前后,治疗组的ADL评分有显著性区别。治疗组的ADL评分有显著升高,根据ADL评分的标准,患者总的生活能力从中度依赖改善为轻度依赖。而对照组没有显著性变化。
3.实验两组应用脑卒中后偏瘫恢复六阶段测评评定表Brunstron测定的比较结果
经过秩和检验发现：Z=-2.517,p=0.012；p<0.05,提示实验前,两组对于脑卒中后偏瘫恢复六阶段测评评定表Brunstron测定,在阶段上有显著性差异。对照组自身前后,对于脑卒中后偏瘫恢复六阶段测评评定表Brunstron测定,Z=-1.289,p=0.197,提示对照组对于脑卒中后偏瘫恢复没有显著性差异。治疗组自身前后,对于脑卒中后偏瘫恢复六阶段测评评定表Brunstron测定,Z=-3.174,p=0.002,p<0.01。提示治疗组对于脑卒中后偏瘫恢复有显著性差异。
4.实验两组应用FIM评分标准的比较
经过独立样本T检验,T=-7.003(p=0.000),由于p<0.01,因此治疗组与对照组比较,治疗前后两组FIM得分改善情况有显着性差异。治疗前后自身对照比较,对照组治疗前与治疗后比较,经过独立样本T检验,T=-1.243(p=0.042),由于p<0.05,说明对照组在治疗前与治疗后比较,对于FIM得分有显著性差异。治疗前后自身对照比较,治疗组治疗前与治疗后比较,经过独立样本T检验,T=-6.117(p=0.000)由于p<0.01,说明对照组在治疗前与治疗后比较,对于FIM得分有显著性差异。
5.实验两组应用SF-36评分标准的比较
经过独立样本T检验,T=-6.002(p=0.000),由于p<0.01,因此治疗组与对照组比较,治疗前后两组SF-36评分改善情况有显着性差异。治疗前后自身对照比较,对照组治疗前与治疗后比较,经过独立样本T检验,T=-1.117(p=0.030),由于p<0.05,说明对照组在治疗前与治疗后比较,对于SF-36评分有显著性差异。治疗前后自身对照比较,治疗组治疗前与治疗后比较,经过独立样本T检验,T=-5.747(p=0.000)由于p<0.05,说明治疗组在治疗前与治疗后比较,对于SF-36评分也有显著性差异。
6.实验两组应用临床总体疗效评价标准的比较
经过秩和检验,Z=-2.823(p=0.005),由于p<0.05,因此治疗组与对照组比较,两者总体疗效具有显着性差异。治疗组总体疗效显著优于对照组。
7.实验两组应用神经功能缺损评价标准的比较
经过秩和检验,z=-2.776(p=0.006),由于p<0.01,因此治疗组与对照组比较,两者神经功能缺损分值的改变具有显着性差异。治疗组神经功能缺损分值的改变优于对照组。
结论：
1.治疗前,实验两组在性别构成,年龄组成以及ADL评分、脑卒中后偏瘫恢复六阶段测评、FIM评分以及SF-36评分都没有显著性差异,两组具有可比性。
2.实验后,实验两组应用ADL评分的比较,治疗组的ADL评分有显著升高,根据ADL评分的标准,患者总的生活能力从中度依赖改善为轻度依赖。而对照组治疗前后没有显著性变化。
3.实验后,实验两组应用脑卒中后偏瘫恢复六阶段测评评定表Brunstron测定的比较,对照组对于脑卒中后偏瘫恢复没有显著性差异。治疗组对于脑卒中后偏瘫恢复有显著性差异。治疗组能有效改善脑卒中后偏瘫恢复的阶段情况。
4.实验后,实验两组应用FIM评分标准的比较,治疗组优于对照组。而且,治疗前后自身对照比较发现,对照组与治疗组都能显著改善FIM得分。
5.实验后,实验两组应用SF-36评分标准的比较,两组SF-36评分改善情况有显着性差异。治疗组优于对照组。而且,治疗前后自身对照比较发现,对照组与治疗组都能显著改善SF-36评分。
6.实验后,实验两组应用临床总体疗效评价标准的比较,治疗组与对照组比较,两者总体疗效具有显着性差异。治疗组临床总体疗效显著优于对照组。
7.实验后,实验两组应用神经功能缺损评价标准的比较,治疗组神经功能缺损分值的改变优于对照组。
Object ive
This clinical study was used randomized controlled design,80cases of Stroke hemiplegia syndrome(SHS) patients according to the principle of randomly divided into2groups, namely control group by traditional acupuncture treatment, treatment group with acupuncture and chiropractic therapy, were observed and compared.7days for a course of treatment, limited to6courses of treatment. And then, the ADL score, hemiplegia after apoplexy recovery six stages of evaluation, FIM score, SF-36score, the total clinical efficacy evaluation criteria and evaluation of neural function defect were observed in experimental group two on apoplectic hemiplegia syndrome clinical efficacy, explores its theoretical basis, in order to better in clinical practice.
Method
The80cases object Whom meet the inclusion criteria according to the principle of randomly divided into2groups, the first group was used acupuncture and chiropractic therapy, the other was used by the traditional acupuncture, the control group by simple acupuncture therapy, acupuncture point selection using awaking brain and adusting mind, methods to dredge main and collateral channels, with hand Jueyin meridian, meridian and foot Taiyin meridian. The treatment group with acupuncture and chiropractic treatment: the acupuncture treatment, but also with chiropractic therapy. Patients with left (right) hand thumb to patients with spine, on the side to push the bar, respectively, to take point out knead technique to shujinhuoxue. And addition and subtraction with the disease:if the patients was facial distortion, plus retractable method; language disadvantage, plus thumb pressure method; high blood pressure, and sweep method; urinary incontinence, with dip method. Once a day, every30minutes. Treatment with acupuncture treatment group was the same. The two groups were treated once a day,7days for a course of treatment, interval of3days, up to6courses of treatment, a total of60days. After treatment using ADL score, hemiplegia after apoplexy recovery six stages of evaluation, FIM score, SF-36score, the total clinical efficacy evaluation criteria and evaluation of neural function defect were observed in experimental group two on apoplectic hemiplegia syndrome clinical efficacy.
Statistical methods:classification of data with x2test, ranked data for two samples Wilcoxon test (calibration), two samples were compared using t test or Wilcoxon test, the t test for comparison or Wilcoxon paired rank sum test.
Result
1. Before treatment, the control group and the treatment group gender composition, age and ADL score, hemiplegia after apoplexy recovery six stages of evaluation, FIM score and SF-36score, p>0.05.
2. The comparison between two groups using ADL score
Through the independent sample T test, T=-5.051(p=0.000), p<0.01, so two groups after the experiment, there were significant differences in ADL score. The treatment group was significantly better than the control group. The control group paired T test was showed, T=0.651(p=0.072), the control group before and after experimental comparison, there is no significant difference. Treatment group was used paired-T test showed, T=-6.002(p=0), p<0.05, before and after the experiment, ADL score of treatment group had significant difference. ADL score of treatment group was significantly increased, according to the ADL score standard, with a total living ability improvement from moderate to mild dependence dependence,while the control group did not change significantly.
3. The comparison between two groups using post-stroke hemiplegia recovery six stages of evaluation scale for Brunstron
After treatment, the test was found that:Z=-2.517, p=0.012; p<0.05, suggested that after the experiment, two groups for post-stroke hemiplegia recovery six stages of evaluation scale Brunstron determination, there was a significant difference in stage. The control group before and after the six stage, recovery evaluation scale Brunstron determination of hemiplegia after stroke, Z=-1.289, p=0.197, indicated control group for hemiplegia after apoplexy recover without significant difference. Before and after the treatment group, recovery six stages of evaluation scale for Brunstron determination of hemiplegia after stroke, Z=-3.174, p=0.002, p<0.05. it indicated that the treatment group for post-stroke hemiplegia recovery had significant difference.
4. Comparison of two groups with FIM score standard
Through the independent sample T test, T=-7.003(p=0.000), p<0.01, so the treatment group compared with the control group, the two groups before and after treatment FIM score improvement have significant differences. Before and after treatment were compared, the control group before and after treatment, through independent sample T test, T=-1.243(p=0.042), because p<0.05, in the control group before and after treatment, there were significant differences in FIM score. Before and after treatment were compared, the treatment group before and after the treatment, through independent sample T test, T=-6.117(p=0.000), because p<0.05, it indicated that in the control group before and after treatment, there were significant differences in FIM score.
5. Comparison of two groups with SF-36score standard
Through the independent sample T test, T=-6.002(p=0.000), p<0.01, so the treatment group compared with the control group, the two groups before and after treatment SF-36score improvement was significant difference. Before and after treatment were compared, the control group before and after treatment, through independent sample T test, T=-1.117(p=0.030), p<0.05, it indicated that in the control group before and after treatment, there were significant differences in SF-36score. Before and after treatment were compared, the treatment group before and after the treatment, through independent sample T test, T=-5.747(p=0.000), p<0.01, it indicated that in the treatment group before and after the treatment, there was also a significant difference in SF-36score.
6. Comparison of two groups with the standard evaluation of clinical application of the total curative effect
After the rank sum test, Z=-2.823(p=0.005), the p<0.01, so the treatment group compared with the control group, the overall effect has significant difference. The overall effect of the treatment group was significantly better than the control group.
7. Comparison of two groups with neural function defect assessment standards
After the rank sum test, Z=-2.776(p=0.006), p<0.01, so the treatment group compared with the control group, the neurological deficit score change has significant difference. The treatment group of neural function defect of the change scores better than the control group.
Conclusion
1. Before treatment, two group in the experimental group in gender, age and ADL score, hemiplegia after apoplexy recovery six stages of evaluation, FIM score and SF-36score were not significant differences, the two groups were comparable.
2. After the experiment, the treatment group two ADL score, ADL score of treatment group was significantly increased, according to the ADL score standard, with a total living ability improvement from moderate to mild dependence dependence, while the control group before and after treatment no significant change.
3. Afterthe experiment, experimental group with application of post-stroke hemiplegia recovery six stages of evaluation scale compared to Brunstron assay, the control group for the stroke hemiplegia recovery without significant difference. There was a significant difference between the treatment group for stroke recovery. The treatment group can be effective in improving post-stroke hemiplegia recovery stage.
4. After the experiment, with FIM score standard, the treatment group was better than the control group. And, before and after treatment compared, the control group and the treatment group all can significantly improve FIM score.
5. After the experiment, with SF-36score standard, two groups of SF-36score improvement was significant difference. The treatment group was better than the control group. And, before and after treatment compared, the control group and the treatment group can significantly improve SF-36score.
6. After the experiment, with evaluation standard in experiment group two clinical curative effect, treatment group and the control group compared, the overall effect has significant difference. The clinical curative effect in treatment group was significantly better than the control group.
7. After the experiment, application of neural function defect evaluation criteria, the treatment group of neural function defect score change than the control group.
本临床实验采用随机对照研究,将80例中风后遗症患者按照随机分组原则分为2组,即对照组单纯采用传统针灸治疗,治疗组则采用针灸配合整脊疗法治疗,进行对比观察。7天为一个疗程,.以6个疗程为限,同时采用ADL评分、脑卒中后偏瘫恢复六阶段测评、FIM评分、SF-36评分、临床总体疗效评价标准以及神经功能缺损评价标准观察实验两组对中风后遗症的临床疗效,探讨其理论依据,以便更好地在临床上推广。
方法：
将符合入选标准的80例中风后遗症患者按照随机分组原则分为2组,即针灸配合整脊疗法组40例,传统针灸对照组40例,对照组采用单纯针灸治疗,针灸取穴采用醒脑调神,疏通经络的方法,以手厥阴经、督脉及足太阴经穴为主。治疗组则采用针灸配合整脊治疗：采用上述针灸治疗方法外,还配合整脊疗法。术者以左(右)手拇指顶住患者脊椎棘突,向对侧推按,分别采用分筋疏理、拿点摩揉等手法以舒筋活血。并随症加减：如患者口眼歪斜,加用收放法；语言不利,加拇指压法；血压升高,加扫散法；小便失禁,加用指拨法。每日一次,每次30分钟。疗程与针灸治疗组相同。两组都治疗每日一次,7天为一个疗程,间隔3天,以6个疗程为限,共计60天。同时采用ADL评分、脑卒中后偏瘫恢复六阶段测评、FIM评分、SF-36评分、临床总体疗效评价标准以及神经功能缺损评价标准观察实验两组对中风后遗症的临床疗效。
统计方法：分类资料用χ2检验,等级资料用两样本比较Wilcoxon秩和检验(校正),两样本均数比较用t检验或Wilcoxon秩和检验,自身前后比较用配对t检验或Wilcoxon配对秩和检验。
结果：
1.治疗前对照组与治疗组性别构成,年龄组成以及ADL评分、脑卒中后偏瘫恢复六阶段测评、FIM评分以及SF-36评分比较,p>0.05。
2.实验两组应用ADL评分的比较结果
经过独立样本T检验,T=-5.051(p=0.000),由于p<0.01,因此两组在实验后比较,ADL评分有显著性差异。治疗组显著优于对照组。对照组自身前后配对T检验显示,T=0.651(p=0.072),提示对照组自身实验前后比较,没有显著性差异。治疗组自身前后配对T检验显示,T=-6.002(p=0.000),由于p<0.01,提示在实验前后,治疗组的ADL评分有显著性区别。治疗组的ADL评分有显著升高,根据ADL评分的标准,患者总的生活能力从中度依赖改善为轻度依赖。而对照组没有显著性变化。
3.实验两组应用脑卒中后偏瘫恢复六阶段测评评定表Brunstron测定的比较结果
经过秩和检验发现：Z=-2.517,p=0.012；p<0.05,提示实验前,两组对于脑卒中后偏瘫恢复六阶段测评评定表Brunstron测定,在阶段上有显著性差异。对照组自身前后,对于脑卒中后偏瘫恢复六阶段测评评定表Brunstron测定,Z=-1.289,p=0.197,提示对照组对于脑卒中后偏瘫恢复没有显著性差异。治疗组自身前后,对于脑卒中后偏瘫恢复六阶段测评评定表Brunstron测定,Z=-3.174,p=0.002,p<0.01。提示治疗组对于脑卒中后偏瘫恢复有显著性差异。
4.实验两组应用FIM评分标准的比较
经过独立样本T检验,T=-7.003(p=0.000),由于p<0.01,因此治疗组与对照组比较,治疗前后两组FIM得分改善情况有显着性差异。治疗前后自身对照比较,对照组治疗前与治疗后比较,经过独立样本T检验,T=-1.243(p=0.042),由于p<0.05,说明对照组在治疗前与治疗后比较,对于FIM得分有显著性差异。治疗前后自身对照比较,治疗组治疗前与治疗后比较,经过独立样本T检验,T=-6.117(p=0.000)由于p<0.01,说明对照组在治疗前与治疗后比较,对于FIM得分有显著性差异。
5.实验两组应用SF-36评分标准的比较
经过独立样本T检验,T=-6.002(p=0.000),由于p<0.01,因此治疗组与对照组比较,治疗前后两组SF-36评分改善情况有显着性差异。治疗前后自身对照比较,对照组治疗前与治疗后比较,经过独立样本T检验,T=-1.117(p=0.030),由于p<0.05,说明对照组在治疗前与治疗后比较,对于SF-36评分有显著性差异。治疗前后自身对照比较,治疗组治疗前与治疗后比较,经过独立样本T检验,T=-5.747(p=0.000)由于p<0.05,说明治疗组在治疗前与治疗后比较,对于SF-36评分也有显著性差异。
6.实验两组应用临床总体疗效评价标准的比较
经过秩和检验,Z=-2.823(p=0.005),由于p<0.05,因此治疗组与对照组比较,两者总体疗效具有显着性差异。治疗组总体疗效显著优于对照组。
7.实验两组应用神经功能缺损评价标准的比较
经过秩和检验,z=-2.776(p=0.006),由于p<0.01,因此治疗组与对照组比较,两者神经功能缺损分值的改变具有显着性差异。治疗组神经功能缺损分值的改变优于对照组。
结论：
1.治疗前,实验两组在性别构成,年龄组成以及ADL评分、脑卒中后偏瘫恢复六阶段测评、FIM评分以及SF-36评分都没有显著性差异,两组具有可比性。
2.实验后,实验两组应用ADL评分的比较,治疗组的ADL评分有显著升高,根据ADL评分的标准,患者总的生活能力从中度依赖改善为轻度依赖。而对照组治疗前后没有显著性变化。
3.实验后,实验两组应用脑卒中后偏瘫恢复六阶段测评评定表Brunstron测定的比较,对照组对于脑卒中后偏瘫恢复没有显著性差异。治疗组对于脑卒中后偏瘫恢复有显著性差异。治疗组能有效改善脑卒中后偏瘫恢复的阶段情况。
4.实验后,实验两组应用FIM评分标准的比较,治疗组优于对照组。而且,治疗前后自身对照比较发现,对照组与治疗组都能显著改善FIM得分。
5.实验后,实验两组应用SF-36评分标准的比较,两组SF-36评分改善情况有显着性差异。治疗组优于对照组。而且,治疗前后自身对照比较发现,对照组与治疗组都能显著改善SF-36评分。
6.实验后,实验两组应用临床总体疗效评价标准的比较,治疗组与对照组比较,两者总体疗效具有显着性差异。治疗组临床总体疗效显著优于对照组。
7.实验后,实验两组应用神经功能缺损评价标准的比较,治疗组神经功能缺损分值的改变优于对照组。
Object ive
This clinical study was used randomized controlled design,80cases of Stroke hemiplegia syndrome(SHS) patients according to the principle of randomly divided into2groups, namely control group by traditional acupuncture treatment, treatment group with acupuncture and chiropractic therapy, were observed and compared.7days for a course of treatment, limited to6courses of treatment. And then, the ADL score, hemiplegia after apoplexy recovery six stages of evaluation, FIM score, SF-36score, the total clinical efficacy evaluation criteria and evaluation of neural function defect were observed in experimental group two on apoplectic hemiplegia syndrome clinical efficacy, explores its theoretical basis, in order to better in clinical practice.
Method
The80cases object Whom meet the inclusion criteria according to the principle of randomly divided into2groups, the first group was used acupuncture and chiropractic therapy, the other was used by the traditional acupuncture, the control group by simple acupuncture therapy, acupuncture point selection using awaking brain and adusting mind, methods to dredge main and collateral channels, with hand Jueyin meridian, meridian and foot Taiyin meridian. The treatment group with acupuncture and chiropractic treatment: the acupuncture treatment, but also with chiropractic therapy. Patients with left (right) hand thumb to patients with spine, on the side to push the bar, respectively, to take point out knead technique to shujinhuoxue. And addition and subtraction with the disease:if the patients was facial distortion, plus retractable method; language disadvantage, plus thumb pressure method; high blood pressure, and sweep method; urinary incontinence, with dip method. Once a day, every30minutes. Treatment with acupuncture treatment group was the same. The two groups were treated once a day,7days for a course of treatment, interval of3days, up to6courses of treatment, a total of60days. After treatment using ADL score, hemiplegia after apoplexy recovery six stages of evaluation, FIM score, SF-36score, the total clinical efficacy evaluation criteria and evaluation of neural function defect were observed in experimental group two on apoplectic hemiplegia syndrome clinical efficacy.
Statistical methods:classification of data with x2test, ranked data for two samples Wilcoxon test (calibration), two samples were compared using t test or Wilcoxon test, the t test for comparison or Wilcoxon paired rank sum test.
Result
1. Before treatment, the control group and the treatment group gender composition, age and ADL score, hemiplegia after apoplexy recovery six stages of evaluation, FIM score and SF-36score, p>0.05.
2. The comparison between two groups using ADL score
Through the independent sample T test, T=-5.051(p=0.000), p<0.01, so two groups after the experiment, there were significant differences in ADL score. The treatment group was significantly better than the control group. The control group paired T test was showed, T=0.651(p=0.072), the control group before and after experimental comparison, there is no significant difference. Treatment group was used paired-T test showed, T=-6.002(p=0), p<0.05, before and after the experiment, ADL score of treatment group had significant difference. ADL score of treatment group was significantly increased, according to the ADL score standard, with a total living ability improvement from moderate to mild dependence dependence,while the control group did not change significantly.
3. The comparison between two groups using post-stroke hemiplegia recovery six stages of evaluation scale for Brunstron
After treatment, the test was found that:Z=-2.517, p=0.012; p<0.05, suggested that after the experiment, two groups for post-stroke hemiplegia recovery six stages of evaluation scale Brunstron determination, there was a significant difference in stage. The control group before and after the six stage, recovery evaluation scale Brunstron determination of hemiplegia after stroke, Z=-1.289, p=0.197, indicated control group for hemiplegia after apoplexy recover without significant difference. Before and after the treatment group, recovery six stages of evaluation scale for Brunstron determination of hemiplegia after stroke, Z=-3.174, p=0.002, p<0.05. it indicated that the treatment group for post-stroke hemiplegia recovery had significant difference.
4. Comparison of two groups with FIM score standard
Through the independent sample T test, T=-7.003(p=0.000), p<0.01, so the treatment group compared with the control group, the two groups before and after treatment FIM score improvement have significant differences. Before and after treatment were compared, the control group before and after treatment, through independent sample T test, T=-1.243(p=0.042), because p<0.05, in the control group before and after treatment, there were significant differences in FIM score. Before and after treatment were compared, the treatment group before and after the treatment, through independent sample T test, T=-6.117(p=0.000), because p<0.05, it indicated that in the control group before and after treatment, there were significant differences in FIM score.
5. Comparison of two groups with SF-36score standard
Through the independent sample T test, T=-6.002(p=0.000), p<0.01, so the treatment group compared with the control group, the two groups before and after treatment SF-36score improvement was significant difference. Before and after treatment were compared, the control group before and after treatment, through independent sample T test, T=-1.117(p=0.030), p<0.05, it indicated that in the control group before and after treatment, there were significant differences in SF-36score. Before and after treatment were compared, the treatment group before and after the treatment, through independent sample T test, T=-5.747(p=0.000), p<0.01, it indicated that in the treatment group before and after the treatment, there was also a significant difference in SF-36score.
6. Comparison of two groups with the standard evaluation of clinical application of the total curative effect
After the rank sum test, Z=-2.823(p=0.005), the p<0.01, so the treatment group compared with the control group, the overall effect has significant difference. The overall effect of the treatment group was significantly better than the control group.
7. Comparison of two groups with neural function defect assessment standards
After the rank sum test, Z=-2.776(p=0.006), p<0.01, so the treatment group compared with the control group, the neurological deficit score change has significant difference. The treatment group of neural function defect of the change scores better than the control group.
Conclusion
1. Before treatment, two group in the experimental group in gender, age and ADL score, hemiplegia after apoplexy recovery six stages of evaluation, FIM score and SF-36score were not significant differences, the two groups were comparable.
2. After the experiment, the treatment group two ADL score, ADL score of treatment group was significantly increased, according to the ADL score standard, with a total living ability improvement from moderate to mild dependence dependence, while the control group before and after treatment no significant change.
3. Afterthe experiment, experimental group with application of post-stroke hemiplegia recovery six stages of evaluation scale compared to Brunstron assay, the control group for the stroke hemiplegia recovery without significant difference. There was a significant difference between the treatment group for stroke recovery. The treatment group can be effective in improving post-stroke hemiplegia recovery stage.
4. After the experiment, with FIM score standard, the treatment group was better than the control group. And, before and after treatment compared, the control group and the treatment group all can significantly improve FIM score.
5. After the experiment, with SF-36score standard, two groups of SF-36score improvement was significant difference. The treatment group was better than the control group. And, before and after treatment compared, the control group and the treatment group can significantly improve SF-36score.
6. After the experiment, with evaluation standard in experiment group two clinical curative effect, treatment group and the control group compared, the overall effect has significant difference. The clinical curative effect in treatment group was significantly better than the control group.
7. After the experiment, application of neural function defect evaluation criteria, the treatment group of neural function defect score change than the control group.
引文
[1]唐可清,田立.中风病机变化分期初探[J].陕西中医,1998,19(1)：22-23.
[2]张智学.中风病机探讨[J].甘肃中医,1997,10(6)：3-4.
[3]王辉,陈兴金,王建国.醒脑开窍针刺法治疗中风后遗症46例[J].中医研究,1997,(04)：44-45.
[4]王振林.针刺配合中药治疗中风后遗症92例临床观察[J].医学理论与实践,2011,(04)：407-408.
[5]李德浩.补阳还五汤加味治疗气虚血瘀型中风后遗症临床观察[J].北京中医药,2011,(()7)：525-527.
[6]吴萍,肖定洪.补阳还五汤加味治疗气虚血瘀型中风后遗症疗效观察[J].上海中医药杂志,2011,(01)：44-45.
[7]李新,刘柏炎,蔺晓源.益气聪明汤化裁治疗中风后遗症30例疗效观察[J].湖南中医杂志,2010,(03)：10-11.
[8]何忠海.脑脉泰胶囊治疗气虚血瘀型中风后遗症的临床研究[J].中国医药指南,2009,(10)：241-242.
[9]李靖杰.中医辨证分型治疗中风后遗症(附90例报告)[J].中国实用医药,2010,(28)：156-157.
[10]刘智垠.中西医结合治疗中风后遗症110例[J].中国中医药现代远程教育,2009,(09)：35.
[11]李省让.分型论治中风后遗症138例分析[J].中华中医药杂志,2009,(04)：467-468.
[12]中华全国中医学会内科学会.中风病中医诊断、疗效评定标准[J].中国医药学报,1986,1(2)：56-57.
[13]中华全国中医学会内科学会.中医急症研究[M],上海：上海中医学院出版社,1989：25-36.
[14]国家中医药管理局脑病急症协作组.中风病诊断与疗效评定标准[J].北京中医药大学学报,1996,19(1)：55-56.
[15]孟家眉,梁宝华,张树懿.脑血管病临床辨证规范化定量化初探[J].中西医结合杂志,1988,8(3)：173-175.
[16]国家中医药管理局脑病急症科研组.中风病辨证诊断标准[J].北京中医药大学学报,1994,17(3)：64-66.
[17]任占利,郭蓉娟.中风病证候诊断标准的研究[J].北京中医药大学学报,1994,19(4)49-50.
[18]姚桂安,姚朋华,姚秀华.益气祛瘀汤配合循经点穴按摩法治疗中风后遗症10年总结[J].中医临床研究,2011,3(7)：76-77.
[19]张爱红.参冬养心汤治疗中风后遗症45例[J].中国中医药现代远程教育,2009,(10)：18.
[20]袁学开.三七补阳还五汤治疗中风后遗症35例[J].河南中医,2010,(02)：170-171.
[21]汤复珍.通窍活血汤合补阳还五汤治疗中风后遗症[J].浙江中医药大学学报,2008,(03)：370-371.
[22]姜树梅.滋阴平肝汤结合体针治疗阴虚型中风后遗症偏瘫36例[J].河南中医,2007,(02)：46-47.
[23]张牧寒,安邦煜.补肾通脉片治疗肾虚痰瘀型中风临床观察[J].中医与杂志,1994,35(11)668-670.
[24]曹志群.通腑降浊法在中风病中的应用[J].山东中医药大学学报,1998,22(3)：192-193.
[25]贾琦.通脉汤治疗中风后遗症82例[J].陕西中医,1997,18(3)：104.
[26]周广宏.健脑补肾汤加味治疗中风后小便失禁经验[J].时珍国医国药,2000,11(7)：652.
[27]苏路伙.中风回春灵治疗中风后遗症235例疗效观察[J].北京中医,1997,(6)：25-26.
[28]卢永兵.益气活血汤治疗老年中风后遗症131例临床研究[J].时珍国医国药,1998,9(6)492.
[29]丁学开.五味通栓口服液治疗中风后遗症180例疗效观察[J].山东医药,2010,(25)：66-67.
[30]顾宜宜,梁惟俊,金德珍等.银丹心脑通软胶囊治疗缺血性中风的临床观察[J].中西医结合心脑血管病杂志,2008,(10)：1515-1516.
[31]徐智英.中风康复丸配合穴位注射治疗中风后遗症51例[J].河南中医,2005,(08)：53.
[32]王丽萍.壮肌灵胶囊治疗中风后遗症疗效分析[J].实用医技杂志,2003,(12)：1390-1391.
[33]刘建军.再生丸治疗中风后遗症456例临床研究[J].山西中医,1995,11(2)：19-20.
[34]刘林凤,安风芹,魏志祥,等.五虫胶囊治疗中风后遗症的临床研究[J].山东中医药大学学报,1999,23(3)：207-208.
[35]李西秦,吴捷,刘勤社.正瘫胶囊治疗中风恢复期的临床与实验研究[J].中国中医药信息杂志,2000,7(9)：41-44.
[36]姜守军,晏军,崔勇.补脑振瘘胶囊治疗缺血性中风后遗症的临床研究[J].河南中医,2001,21(5)：26-28.
[37]周健.通心络胶囊治疗中风后遗症42例[J].现代中西医结合杂志,2003,12(1)：41-42.
[38]王凌,党建军,黄武.强筋健骨丸治疗中风后遗症42例疗效分析[J].山西中医学院学报,2003,4(1)：27-28.
[39]张树军,王巧玲.苍耳根治中风后遗症肢肿[J].四川中医,1992,(3)：13.
[40]洪敦书.大风艾治疗中风后遗症48例[J].实用中医杂志,1999, (5)：25.
[41]周伍华,李宪科.大剂量黄芪对中风后遗症30例疗效观察[J].湖南中医药导报,1999,5(3)：28.
[42]况时祥.运用马钱子治疗中风病体会[J].江苏中医,1999,20(2)：45-46.
[43]李静铭.试谈阴经穴在针灸治疗中风偏瘫中的作用[J].江苏中医,2000,(08)：9-10.
[44]赵维平.针刺治疗中风70例临床分析[J].上海针灸杂志,1992,(4)：10-11.
[45]王宏志.针刺治疗中风偏瘫1620例临床观察[J].中国针灸,1991,(6)：1-2.
[46]邢贵方.针刺治疗急性中风中经络70例临床观察[J].中国中医急症,1995,4(2)：67-68.
[47]王杰,李桂清,王鹏琴,等.中风病急性期针药疗效的对比观察[J].针灸临床杂志,1997,13(1)：14-15.
[48]石学敏.针刺治疗中风病的临床研究[J].上海针灸杂志,1992,(4)：4-7.
[49]靳瑞.颞三针治疗中风后遗症的临床观察[J].中国针灸,1993,(1)：11-12.
[50]迪亚拉,靳瑞.“颞三针”治疗中风急性期的研究[J].针灸临床杂志,1995,11(8)：25-27.
[51]孙杂健,康凯,顾承英.全息疗法及临床应用[J].滨州医学院学报,1995,18(5)：53.
[52]田胜利,朱慧军,王建华.十四经全息针法治疗急性期中风病52例疗效观察[J].中国临床医药研究杂志,2000,12(1)：62.
[53]黄华业.金宏柱教授崇“松、顺、动”原则治疗中风后遗症[J].中国实用医药,2010,5(23)：245-246.
[54]田雨海,魏锦峰.浅淡中风后遗症——半身不遂的康复治疗[J].按摩与导引,2007,23(1)： 7.
[55]赖芳山.益气活血针法治疗缺血性中风32例临床研究[J].中国中西医结合杂志,1992,12(3)：139.
[56]王志秀.针刺治疗中风后遗症124例[J].陕西中医杂志,1992;13(4)：177.
[57]齐建兴.针灸“中气法”治疗痰瘀阻络型中风后遗症30例临床观察[J].临床合理用药,2011,4(10)：81-82.
[58]张自茂,冯崇廉,皮周凯,等.针刺治疗脑卒中后上肢痉挛疗效观察[J].中国针灸,2008,28(4)：257-260.
[59]曾学清,李艳,滕东时,等.针刺治疗中风后足下垂疗效观察[J].上海针灸杂志,2008,27(1)：23-24.
[60]林琳,楚佳梅.针灸推拿配合促通技术治疗中风后遗症的临床研究[J].中国实验方剂学杂志,2008,(05)：77-78.
[61]卞金玲,张春红,李金波,张艳,丁淑强,贺军,石学敏.醒脑开窍法治疗中风后中重度吞咽障碍疗效观察[J].中国针灸,2005,(05)：307-308.
[62]宇傲霜,赵美丽.醒脑开窍法与其他疗法有机结合的思考[J].中国中医基础医学杂志,2006,(07)：540-541.
[63]张采真.醒脑开窍针刺法治疗中风后抑郁症45例疗效观察[J].新中医,2004,(08)：50-51.
[64]周继曾,张存生,李力,周时伟.醒脑开窍针刺治疗中风后遗症的临床研究[J].中国针灸,1995,(03)：6-8,57.
[65]王辉,陈兴金,王建国.醒脑开窍针刺法治疗中风后遗症46例[J].中医研究,1997,(04)：47-48.
[66]叶信画,杨少华.醒脑开窍针刺法治疗脑卒中偏瘫40例[J].实用中西医结合临床,2008,(01)：17-18.
[67]李华南,马菲,高旸.醒脑开窍针刺法结合腧穴热敏化灸治疗中风后尿失禁42例[J].湖南中医杂志,2011,(01)：50-51.
[68]中鹏飞,孔莉,石学敏.醒脑开窍针法治疗卒中后抑郁症临床研究[J].中国针灸,2005,(01)：15-17.
[69]李慧,梁伟雄,郭新峰.醒脑开窍针法治疗中风的Meta分析[J].广州中医药大学学报,2004,(03)：215-219.
[70]郑宗吕.头针加体针治疗中风后遗症674例-广东省中医院针灸科[J].实用医学杂志,1994,(04)：400-403.
[71]沈文清,甘丽娇.腹针配合头针治疗中风后尿便失禁62例[J].四川中医,2012,(02)：120-121.
[72]陈莉秋,苗荃,张娜.头针、腹针、康复训练和心理干预并用治疗中风后遗症30例[J].河北中医,2010,(05)：717-719.
[73]王素霞,杨传彪.头针为主治疗中风后失语症50例疗效观察[J].新中医,2001,(09)：47.
[74]赵大贵,穆敬平.头针结合促通技术对脑卒中偏瘫康复疗效的观察[J].中国针灸,2005,(01)：23-24.
[75]苏尔亮.头针为主治疗中风偏瘫105例疗效观察[J].湖南中医杂志,2003,(03)：27-28.
[76]王鑫.头体针结合治疗中风后遗症152例[J].光明中医,2013,(03)：548-549.
[77]李英.中风后遗症的头针治疗[J].河北中医,2008,(02)：177-178.
[78]纪大松.头针配合体针治疗中风后遗症86例[J].陕西中医学院学报,2003,(04)：38.
[79]王伟,孙占玲,张奕,寿芳.头针治疗中风后遗症临床观察[J].辽宁中医杂志,2002,(10)：619.
[80]文雅,杨斌.中药配合腹针治疗中风后遗症临床观察[J].山西中医,2008,(S1)：39.
[81]闫佩峰,范月侠,马安红.针药康复并用治疗中风后遗症疗效观察[J].宁夏医科大学学报,2012,(11)：1231-1232.
[82]钱铎.针药并用治疗中风后遗症218例[J].浙江中医学院学报,1987,(06)：51-52.
[83]万素英,何霞.中风后遗症康复及护理总结[J].实用中医药杂志,2011,(04)：276-277.
[84]孙国荣.严隽陶老师推拿治疗脑梗塞后偏瘫的经验[J].按摩与导引,2005,21(6)：24.
[85]杨少峰,李军,丁乙夫.节段性按摩法治疗脑出血偏瘫患者30例初探[J].中国临床康复,2002,6(13)：1993.
[86]杨永谦,谢剑.推拿治疗偏瘫八法[J].按摩与导引,1999,15(3)：45.
[87]李玉亮.再谈“按摩以脊背为纲”[J].按摩与导引,2006,22(11)：35.
[88]陆筱安.按摩与导引在中风康复临床上的应用[J].按摩与导引,2007,24(2)：32.
[89]徐力.推拿治疗中风后遗症110例[J].中国水电医学,2006(1)：19.
[90]郭泽新,陈卫华.缓解中风偏瘫痉挛状态推拿手法及其机理探讨[J].按摩与导引,2003,19(1)：2.
[91]卢锦华.58例中风患者康复护理体会[J].井冈山医专学报,2001,8(2)：89.
[92]王永泉,刘喆,张风花.整脊推拿法干预亚健康状态的初步研究[J].中医外治杂志,2008,(03)：7-9.
[93]赵金华,王明杰.整脊手法对椎动脉型颈椎病椎-基底动脉血流变的影响[J].河南中医,2011,(07)：784-785.
[94]向开维,范宏元.头针合整脊治疗腰椎间盘突出症降钙素基因相关肽的临床研究[J].辽宁中医杂志,2008,(12)：1903-1905.
[95]吴承亮,章明.整脊疗法治疗腰椎间盘突出症的机理探讨——附210例临床分析[J].浙江中医学院学报,2000,(04)：60.
[96]王伟.整脊疗法及其应用机理探讨[J].河南中医,2008,(07)：18-19.
[97]刘忠建.针刀整脊疗法治疗II型糖尿病的体会和机理探讨[A].中国中医药学会针刀医学会.首届国际针刀医学学术交流会论文集[C].中国中医药学会针刀医学会,1999,2.
[98]王振林.推拿对中风后遗症患者生存质量的影响[J].现代中西医结合杂志,2010,(31)：3382-3383.
[99]孟庆良,郭会卿,郑福增,等.脊得舒丸结合整脊疗法治疗颈型颈椎病52例.中医研究,2012,25(3)：36-38.
[100]高翔,吴弢,瞿估.卧位整脊疗法治疗非脊髓型颈椎病临床观察.上海中医药大学学报,2011,25(2)：42-44.
[101]刘秋梅.小针刀加整脊疗法治疗颈椎病174例疗效观察及护理.针灸临床杂志,2002,18(6)：27-28
[102]杨尊求.疗法配合针灸疗法治疗神经根型颈椎病的临床疗效观察.针灸临床杂志,2011,27(6)：30-33.
[103]赵爱泉,孙庭婷,罗军.牵引整脊疗法治疗腰椎间盘突出症45例.江西中医药,2006,37(287)：34-35.
[104]刘农虞.经络整脊疗法治疗腰椎间盘突出症27例.南京中医药大学学报(自然科学版),2001,17(3)：176-177.
[105]薛战礼,李芳玲.脊诊整脊疗法治疗腰椎间盘突出症的疗效观察.颈腰痛杂志,2011,32(2)：157-158.
[106]时圣瑞.温针加整脊疗法治疗腰椎间盘突出症疗效分析.中医外治杂志,2003,12(4)：26-27.
[107]吴承亮,章明.整脊疗法治疗腰椎间盘突出症的机理探讨-附210例临床分析.浙江中医学院学报,2000,24(4)：60.
[108]陈朝明.针刺配合整脊疗法治疗会阴部疼痛6例分析.中国误诊学杂志2008,8(25)：6270-6271.
[109]杨来福,刘星,王文彪.针刀结合整脊疗法治疗痤疮34例.中国针灸,2010,30(3)243-244.
[110]孙秀娟,李永明.整脊疗法并谷维素治疗慢性功能性便秘疗效观察.中国误诊学杂志,2009,9(27)：6627-6628.
[111]李永明,孙秀娟,王红.整脊疗法联合硝苯地平治疗慢性功能性腹泻48例分析.中国误诊学杂杂志,2009,9(34)：8495-8496.
[112]岳延荣.运用整脊疗法及波姆红外光照射治疗颈椎病引起眼部症状32例.针灸临床杂志,2005,21(8)：47.
[113]张煜新,袁学雅,邢增东.整脊疗法对功能性消化不良患者胃动素、胃泌素的影响.山西中医,2009,25(3)：27-29.
[114]杨培林,刘磊,赵广有.整脊疗法治疗棘上韧带炎32例.长春中医药大学学报,2010,26(4)：551.
[115]罗石坚.整脊疗法治疗支气管炎疗效观察.广西医学,2003,25(3)：465-466.
[116]孙宇,蔡饮林,党耕町,等.慢性压迫性颈脊椎髓病患者的肺功能变化.中国脊椎脊髓杂志,2000：10(5)：139.
[117]曾展鹏,周琦石,黄学员,等.整脊疗法治疗纤维肌痛综合征28例疗效观察.新中医,2011,43(9)：54-55.
[118]王伟.整脊疗法及其应用机理探讨.河南中医,2008,28(7)：18-19.
[119]王冰,张芳.奥拉西坦对脑梗死后遗症患者生活质量影响的观察[J].中国实用神经疾病杂志,2009,(19)：65-66.
[120]唐胜南.奥拉西坦治疗脑梗死后遗症的临床观察[J].中国实用神经疾病杂志,2008,(04)：43-44.
[121]冯淑曼,马建军,滕军放,等.奥拉西坦对脑梗死后遗症患者生活质量疗效观察[J].中国实用神经疾病杂志,2010,(13)：12-13.
[122]于良,赵国喜,万义.奥拉西坦辅治脑梗死后遗症患者生活质量的效果观察[J].临床合理用药杂志,2012,(28)：71-72.
[123]孔毅.步长脑心通治疗脑梗死后遗症52例疗效观察[J].临床合理用药杂志,2010,(08)：38.
[124]刘建芳.长春西汀治疗脑梗死后遗症患者90例疗效观察[J].中国实用神经疾病杂志,2008,(03)：63-64.
[125]张弘,胡金花,刘晓芳.长春西汀注射液治疗脑梗死后遗症[J].中国老年保健医学,2007,(06)：56-57.
[126]徐光燕,向周.法舒地尔对急性脑梗死后遗症治疗作用的临床观察[J].西南国防医药,2012,(02)：141-144.
[127]武双林,王亮.经颈内动脉骨髓干细胞移植治疗脑梗死后遗症[J].内蒙古医学院学 报,2012,(01)：30-33.
[128]沈庆.马来酸桂哌齐特注射液辅治脑梗死后遗症疗效观察[J].浙江中西医结合杂志,2011,(05)：323-324,327.
[129]李华,刘爱军,李勇跃.脑活素治疗脑动脉梗死后遗症的疗效观察[J].现代中西医结合杂志,2009,(01)：37-38.
[130]袁进国,冯斌,曹藏柱,等.脐带间充质干细胞移植并康复治疗脑出血后遗症1年随访[J].中国组织工程研究,2012,(14)：2656-2660.
[131]何芳,叶路.神经干细胞移植治疗脑出血后遗症2例分析[J].中国误诊学杂志,2011,(36)：8979.
[132]杨清成,梁长春,李敏霞,等.神经干细胞移植治疗脑卒中后遗症59例[J].中国组织工程研究与临床康复,2007,(20)：4033-4035.
[133]焦红亮,关方霞,杨波,等.腰椎穿刺移植自体骨髓间充质干细胞治疗脑梗死后遗症6例[J].中国组织工程研究与临床康复,2010,(49)：9172-9175.
[134]詹三华,张鲁峰,姚卫民,等.自体骨髓间充质干细胞移植治疗脑梗死后遗症30例[J].中国老年学杂志,2012,(21)：4821-4822.
[135]赵志一.血液平衡净化疗法对脑梗死后遗症期疗效观察.山西中医学院学报,2004,5(4)43.
[136]于莉莉.推拿整脊的生理作用探析[J].陕西中医,2007,(11)：1575-1576.
[2]张智学.中风病机探讨[J].甘肃中医,1997,10(6)：3-4.
[3]王辉,陈兴金,王建国.醒脑开窍针刺法治疗中风后遗症46例[J].中医研究,1997,(04)：44-45.
[4]王振林.针刺配合中药治疗中风后遗症92例临床观察[J].医学理论与实践,2011,(04)：407-408.
[5]李德浩.补阳还五汤加味治疗气虚血瘀型中风后遗症临床观察[J].北京中医药,2011,(()7)：525-527.
[6]吴萍,肖定洪.补阳还五汤加味治疗气虚血瘀型中风后遗症疗效观察[J].上海中医药杂志,2011,(01)：44-45.
[7]李新,刘柏炎,蔺晓源.益气聪明汤化裁治疗中风后遗症30例疗效观察[J].湖南中医杂志,2010,(03)：10-11.
[8]何忠海.脑脉泰胶囊治疗气虚血瘀型中风后遗症的临床研究[J].中国医药指南,2009,(10)：241-242.
[9]李靖杰.中医辨证分型治疗中风后遗症(附90例报告)[J].中国实用医药,2010,(28)：156-157.
[10]刘智垠.中西医结合治疗中风后遗症110例[J].中国中医药现代远程教育,2009,(09)：35.
[11]李省让.分型论治中风后遗症138例分析[J].中华中医药杂志,2009,(04)：467-468.
[12]中华全国中医学会内科学会.中风病中医诊断、疗效评定标准[J].中国医药学报,1986,1(2)：56-57.
[13]中华全国中医学会内科学会.中医急症研究[M],上海：上海中医学院出版社,1989：25-36.
[14]国家中医药管理局脑病急症协作组.中风病诊断与疗效评定标准[J].北京中医药大学学报,1996,19(1)：55-56.
[15]孟家眉,梁宝华,张树懿.脑血管病临床辨证规范化定量化初探[J].中西医结合杂志,1988,8(3)：173-175.
[16]国家中医药管理局脑病急症科研组.中风病辨证诊断标准[J].北京中医药大学学报,1994,17(3)：64-66.
[17]任占利,郭蓉娟.中风病证候诊断标准的研究[J].北京中医药大学学报,1994,19(4)49-50.
[18]姚桂安,姚朋华,姚秀华.益气祛瘀汤配合循经点穴按摩法治疗中风后遗症10年总结[J].中医临床研究,2011,3(7)：76-77.
[19]张爱红.参冬养心汤治疗中风后遗症45例[J].中国中医药现代远程教育,2009,(10)：18.
[20]袁学开.三七补阳还五汤治疗中风后遗症35例[J].河南中医,2010,(02)：170-171.
[21]汤复珍.通窍活血汤合补阳还五汤治疗中风后遗症[J].浙江中医药大学学报,2008,(03)：370-371.
[22]姜树梅.滋阴平肝汤结合体针治疗阴虚型中风后遗症偏瘫36例[J].河南中医,2007,(02)：46-47.
[23]张牧寒,安邦煜.补肾通脉片治疗肾虚痰瘀型中风临床观察[J].中医与杂志,1994,35(11)668-670.
[24]曹志群.通腑降浊法在中风病中的应用[J].山东中医药大学学报,1998,22(3)：192-193.
[25]贾琦.通脉汤治疗中风后遗症82例[J].陕西中医,1997,18(3)：104.
[26]周广宏.健脑补肾汤加味治疗中风后小便失禁经验[J].时珍国医国药,2000,11(7)：652.
[27]苏路伙.中风回春灵治疗中风后遗症235例疗效观察[J].北京中医,1997,(6)：25-26.
[28]卢永兵.益气活血汤治疗老年中风后遗症131例临床研究[J].时珍国医国药,1998,9(6)492.
[29]丁学开.五味通栓口服液治疗中风后遗症180例疗效观察[J].山东医药,2010,(25)：66-67.
[30]顾宜宜,梁惟俊,金德珍等.银丹心脑通软胶囊治疗缺血性中风的临床观察[J].中西医结合心脑血管病杂志,2008,(10)：1515-1516.
[31]徐智英.中风康复丸配合穴位注射治疗中风后遗症51例[J].河南中医,2005,(08)：53.
[32]王丽萍.壮肌灵胶囊治疗中风后遗症疗效分析[J].实用医技杂志,2003,(12)：1390-1391.
[33]刘建军.再生丸治疗中风后遗症456例临床研究[J].山西中医,1995,11(2)：19-20.
[34]刘林凤,安风芹,魏志祥,等.五虫胶囊治疗中风后遗症的临床研究[J].山东中医药大学学报,1999,23(3)：207-208.
[35]李西秦,吴捷,刘勤社.正瘫胶囊治疗中风恢复期的临床与实验研究[J].中国中医药信息杂志,2000,7(9)：41-44.
[36]姜守军,晏军,崔勇.补脑振瘘胶囊治疗缺血性中风后遗症的临床研究[J].河南中医,2001,21(5)：26-28.
[37]周健.通心络胶囊治疗中风后遗症42例[J].现代中西医结合杂志,2003,12(1)：41-42.
[38]王凌,党建军,黄武.强筋健骨丸治疗中风后遗症42例疗效分析[J].山西中医学院学报,2003,4(1)：27-28.
[39]张树军,王巧玲.苍耳根治中风后遗症肢肿[J].四川中医,1992,(3)：13.
[40]洪敦书.大风艾治疗中风后遗症48例[J].实用中医杂志,1999, (5)：25.
[41]周伍华,李宪科.大剂量黄芪对中风后遗症30例疗效观察[J].湖南中医药导报,1999,5(3)：28.
[42]况时祥.运用马钱子治疗中风病体会[J].江苏中医,1999,20(2)：45-46.
[43]李静铭.试谈阴经穴在针灸治疗中风偏瘫中的作用[J].江苏中医,2000,(08)：9-10.
[44]赵维平.针刺治疗中风70例临床分析[J].上海针灸杂志,1992,(4)：10-11.
[45]王宏志.针刺治疗中风偏瘫1620例临床观察[J].中国针灸,1991,(6)：1-2.
[46]邢贵方.针刺治疗急性中风中经络70例临床观察[J].中国中医急症,1995,4(2)：67-68.
[47]王杰,李桂清,王鹏琴,等.中风病急性期针药疗效的对比观察[J].针灸临床杂志,1997,13(1)：14-15.
[48]石学敏.针刺治疗中风病的临床研究[J].上海针灸杂志,1992,(4)：4-7.
[49]靳瑞.颞三针治疗中风后遗症的临床观察[J].中国针灸,1993,(1)：11-12.
[50]迪亚拉,靳瑞.“颞三针”治疗中风急性期的研究[J].针灸临床杂志,1995,11(8)：25-27.
[51]孙杂健,康凯,顾承英.全息疗法及临床应用[J].滨州医学院学报,1995,18(5)：53.
[52]田胜利,朱慧军,王建华.十四经全息针法治疗急性期中风病52例疗效观察[J].中国临床医药研究杂志,2000,12(1)：62.
[53]黄华业.金宏柱教授崇“松、顺、动”原则治疗中风后遗症[J].中国实用医药,2010,5(23)：245-246.
[54]田雨海,魏锦峰.浅淡中风后遗症——半身不遂的康复治疗[J].按摩与导引,2007,23(1)： 7.
[55]赖芳山.益气活血针法治疗缺血性中风32例临床研究[J].中国中西医结合杂志,1992,12(3)：139.
[56]王志秀.针刺治疗中风后遗症124例[J].陕西中医杂志,1992;13(4)：177.
[57]齐建兴.针灸“中气法”治疗痰瘀阻络型中风后遗症30例临床观察[J].临床合理用药,2011,4(10)：81-82.
[58]张自茂,冯崇廉,皮周凯,等.针刺治疗脑卒中后上肢痉挛疗效观察[J].中国针灸,2008,28(4)：257-260.
[59]曾学清,李艳,滕东时,等.针刺治疗中风后足下垂疗效观察[J].上海针灸杂志,2008,27(1)：23-24.
[60]林琳,楚佳梅.针灸推拿配合促通技术治疗中风后遗症的临床研究[J].中国实验方剂学杂志,2008,(05)：77-78.
[61]卞金玲,张春红,李金波,张艳,丁淑强,贺军,石学敏.醒脑开窍法治疗中风后中重度吞咽障碍疗效观察[J].中国针灸,2005,(05)：307-308.
[62]宇傲霜,赵美丽.醒脑开窍法与其他疗法有机结合的思考[J].中国中医基础医学杂志,2006,(07)：540-541.
[63]张采真.醒脑开窍针刺法治疗中风后抑郁症45例疗效观察[J].新中医,2004,(08)：50-51.
[64]周继曾,张存生,李力,周时伟.醒脑开窍针刺治疗中风后遗症的临床研究[J].中国针灸,1995,(03)：6-8,57.
[65]王辉,陈兴金,王建国.醒脑开窍针刺法治疗中风后遗症46例[J].中医研究,1997,(04)：47-48.
[66]叶信画,杨少华.醒脑开窍针刺法治疗脑卒中偏瘫40例[J].实用中西医结合临床,2008,(01)：17-18.
[67]李华南,马菲,高旸.醒脑开窍针刺法结合腧穴热敏化灸治疗中风后尿失禁42例[J].湖南中医杂志,2011,(01)：50-51.
[68]中鹏飞,孔莉,石学敏.醒脑开窍针法治疗卒中后抑郁症临床研究[J].中国针灸,2005,(01)：15-17.
[69]李慧,梁伟雄,郭新峰.醒脑开窍针法治疗中风的Meta分析[J].广州中医药大学学报,2004,(03)：215-219.
[70]郑宗吕.头针加体针治疗中风后遗症674例-广东省中医院针灸科[J].实用医学杂志,1994,(04)：400-403.
[71]沈文清,甘丽娇.腹针配合头针治疗中风后尿便失禁62例[J].四川中医,2012,(02)：120-121.
[72]陈莉秋,苗荃,张娜.头针、腹针、康复训练和心理干预并用治疗中风后遗症30例[J].河北中医,2010,(05)：717-719.
[73]王素霞,杨传彪.头针为主治疗中风后失语症50例疗效观察[J].新中医,2001,(09)：47.
[74]赵大贵,穆敬平.头针结合促通技术对脑卒中偏瘫康复疗效的观察[J].中国针灸,2005,(01)：23-24.
[75]苏尔亮.头针为主治疗中风偏瘫105例疗效观察[J].湖南中医杂志,2003,(03)：27-28.
[76]王鑫.头体针结合治疗中风后遗症152例[J].光明中医,2013,(03)：548-549.
[77]李英.中风后遗症的头针治疗[J].河北中医,2008,(02)：177-178.
[78]纪大松.头针配合体针治疗中风后遗症86例[J].陕西中医学院学报,2003,(04)：38.
[79]王伟,孙占玲,张奕,寿芳.头针治疗中风后遗症临床观察[J].辽宁中医杂志,2002,(10)：619.
[80]文雅,杨斌.中药配合腹针治疗中风后遗症临床观察[J].山西中医,2008,(S1)：39.
[81]闫佩峰,范月侠,马安红.针药康复并用治疗中风后遗症疗效观察[J].宁夏医科大学学报,2012,(11)：1231-1232.
[82]钱铎.针药并用治疗中风后遗症218例[J].浙江中医学院学报,1987,(06)：51-52.
[83]万素英,何霞.中风后遗症康复及护理总结[J].实用中医药杂志,2011,(04)：276-277.
[84]孙国荣.严隽陶老师推拿治疗脑梗塞后偏瘫的经验[J].按摩与导引,2005,21(6)：24.
[85]杨少峰,李军,丁乙夫.节段性按摩法治疗脑出血偏瘫患者30例初探[J].中国临床康复,2002,6(13)：1993.
[86]杨永谦,谢剑.推拿治疗偏瘫八法[J].按摩与导引,1999,15(3)：45.
[87]李玉亮.再谈“按摩以脊背为纲”[J].按摩与导引,2006,22(11)：35.
[88]陆筱安.按摩与导引在中风康复临床上的应用[J].按摩与导引,2007,24(2)：32.
[89]徐力.推拿治疗中风后遗症110例[J].中国水电医学,2006(1)：19.
[90]郭泽新,陈卫华.缓解中风偏瘫痉挛状态推拿手法及其机理探讨[J].按摩与导引,2003,19(1)：2.
[91]卢锦华.58例中风患者康复护理体会[J].井冈山医专学报,2001,8(2)：89.
[92]王永泉,刘喆,张风花.整脊推拿法干预亚健康状态的初步研究[J].中医外治杂志,2008,(03)：7-9.
[93]赵金华,王明杰.整脊手法对椎动脉型颈椎病椎-基底动脉血流变的影响[J].河南中医,2011,(07)：784-785.
[94]向开维,范宏元.头针合整脊治疗腰椎间盘突出症降钙素基因相关肽的临床研究[J].辽宁中医杂志,2008,(12)：1903-1905.
[95]吴承亮,章明.整脊疗法治疗腰椎间盘突出症的机理探讨——附210例临床分析[J].浙江中医学院学报,2000,(04)：60.
[96]王伟.整脊疗法及其应用机理探讨[J].河南中医,2008,(07)：18-19.
[97]刘忠建.针刀整脊疗法治疗II型糖尿病的体会和机理探讨[A].中国中医药学会针刀医学会.首届国际针刀医学学术交流会论文集[C].中国中医药学会针刀医学会,1999,2.
[98]王振林.推拿对中风后遗症患者生存质量的影响[J].现代中西医结合杂志,2010,(31)：3382-3383.
[99]孟庆良,郭会卿,郑福增,等.脊得舒丸结合整脊疗法治疗颈型颈椎病52例.中医研究,2012,25(3)：36-38.
[100]高翔,吴弢,瞿估.卧位整脊疗法治疗非脊髓型颈椎病临床观察.上海中医药大学学报,2011,25(2)：42-44.
[101]刘秋梅.小针刀加整脊疗法治疗颈椎病174例疗效观察及护理.针灸临床杂志,2002,18(6)：27-28
[102]杨尊求.疗法配合针灸疗法治疗神经根型颈椎病的临床疗效观察.针灸临床杂志,2011,27(6)：30-33.
[103]赵爱泉,孙庭婷,罗军.牵引整脊疗法治疗腰椎间盘突出症45例.江西中医药,2006,37(287)：34-35.
[104]刘农虞.经络整脊疗法治疗腰椎间盘突出症27例.南京中医药大学学报(自然科学版),2001,17(3)：176-177.
[105]薛战礼,李芳玲.脊诊整脊疗法治疗腰椎间盘突出症的疗效观察.颈腰痛杂志,2011,32(2)：157-158.
[106]时圣瑞.温针加整脊疗法治疗腰椎间盘突出症疗效分析.中医外治杂志,2003,12(4)：26-27.
[107]吴承亮,章明.整脊疗法治疗腰椎间盘突出症的机理探讨-附210例临床分析.浙江中医学院学报,2000,24(4)：60.
[108]陈朝明.针刺配合整脊疗法治疗会阴部疼痛6例分析.中国误诊学杂志2008,8(25)：6270-6271.
[109]杨来福,刘星,王文彪.针刀结合整脊疗法治疗痤疮34例.中国针灸,2010,30(3)243-244.
[110]孙秀娟,李永明.整脊疗法并谷维素治疗慢性功能性便秘疗效观察.中国误诊学杂志,2009,9(27)：6627-6628.
[111]李永明,孙秀娟,王红.整脊疗法联合硝苯地平治疗慢性功能性腹泻48例分析.中国误诊学杂杂志,2009,9(34)：8495-8496.
[112]岳延荣.运用整脊疗法及波姆红外光照射治疗颈椎病引起眼部症状32例.针灸临床杂志,2005,21(8)：47.
[113]张煜新,袁学雅,邢增东.整脊疗法对功能性消化不良患者胃动素、胃泌素的影响.山西中医,2009,25(3)：27-29.
[114]杨培林,刘磊,赵广有.整脊疗法治疗棘上韧带炎32例.长春中医药大学学报,2010,26(4)：551.
[115]罗石坚.整脊疗法治疗支气管炎疗效观察.广西医学,2003,25(3)：465-466.
[116]孙宇,蔡饮林,党耕町,等.慢性压迫性颈脊椎髓病患者的肺功能变化.中国脊椎脊髓杂志,2000：10(5)：139.
[117]曾展鹏,周琦石,黄学员,等.整脊疗法治疗纤维肌痛综合征28例疗效观察.新中医,2011,43(9)：54-55.
[118]王伟.整脊疗法及其应用机理探讨.河南中医,2008,28(7)：18-19.
[119]王冰,张芳.奥拉西坦对脑梗死后遗症患者生活质量影响的观察[J].中国实用神经疾病杂志,2009,(19)：65-66.
[120]唐胜南.奥拉西坦治疗脑梗死后遗症的临床观察[J].中国实用神经疾病杂志,2008,(04)：43-44.
[121]冯淑曼,马建军,滕军放,等.奥拉西坦对脑梗死后遗症患者生活质量疗效观察[J].中国实用神经疾病杂志,2010,(13)：12-13.
[122]于良,赵国喜,万义.奥拉西坦辅治脑梗死后遗症患者生活质量的效果观察[J].临床合理用药杂志,2012,(28)：71-72.
[123]孔毅.步长脑心通治疗脑梗死后遗症52例疗效观察[J].临床合理用药杂志,2010,(08)：38.
[124]刘建芳.长春西汀治疗脑梗死后遗症患者90例疗效观察[J].中国实用神经疾病杂志,2008,(03)：63-64.
[125]张弘,胡金花,刘晓芳.长春西汀注射液治疗脑梗死后遗症[J].中国老年保健医学,2007,(06)：56-57.
[126]徐光燕,向周.法舒地尔对急性脑梗死后遗症治疗作用的临床观察[J].西南国防医药,2012,(02)：141-144.
[127]武双林,王亮.经颈内动脉骨髓干细胞移植治疗脑梗死后遗症[J].内蒙古医学院学 报,2012,(01)：30-33.
[128]沈庆.马来酸桂哌齐特注射液辅治脑梗死后遗症疗效观察[J].浙江中西医结合杂志,2011,(05)：323-324,327.
[129]李华,刘爱军,李勇跃.脑活素治疗脑动脉梗死后遗症的疗效观察[J].现代中西医结合杂志,2009,(01)：37-38.
[130]袁进国,冯斌,曹藏柱,等.脐带间充质干细胞移植并康复治疗脑出血后遗症1年随访[J].中国组织工程研究,2012,(14)：2656-2660.
[131]何芳,叶路.神经干细胞移植治疗脑出血后遗症2例分析[J].中国误诊学杂志,2011,(36)：8979.
[132]杨清成,梁长春,李敏霞,等.神经干细胞移植治疗脑卒中后遗症59例[J].中国组织工程研究与临床康复,2007,(20)：4033-4035.
[133]焦红亮,关方霞,杨波,等.腰椎穿刺移植自体骨髓间充质干细胞治疗脑梗死后遗症6例[J].中国组织工程研究与临床康复,2010,(49)：9172-9175.
[134]詹三华,张鲁峰,姚卫民,等.自体骨髓间充质干细胞移植治疗脑梗死后遗症30例[J].中国老年学杂志,2012,(21)：4821-4822.
[135]赵志一.血液平衡净化疗法对脑梗死后遗症期疗效观察.山西中医学院学报,2004,5(4)43.
[136]于莉莉.推拿整脊的生理作用探析[J].陕西中医,2007,(11)：1575-1576.