[[alternative]]Effects of Modulated Middle- Frequency Electrical Stimulator on Meridian for Women‘s Primary Dysmenorrhea

[[abstract]]本研究旨在探討經由非侵入性之中周波儀刺激合谷與三陰交等二個穴位對於婦女原發性痛經的改善成效。研究方法：採單盲隨機分配方式收集66位有發性痛經的個案，這些個案皆接受超音波檢查及抽血檢驗CA-125數據於標準值內，以為確定病例，共有實驗組34人、對照組32人，主要結果測量工具採用包含McGill Questionnaire Short-form及NRS(NumericalRating Scale)等二項問卷。實驗組以非侵入性中周波電刺激儀 (AL-TENS)之貼片貼於合谷及三陰交等二處穴位，每次二十分鐘，每週二次連續八週不間斷，控制組則貼於二處非穴位部位，治療時間與實驗組相同。結果：在介入中周波儀前二組的疼痛的分數及疼痛的強度並無不同，但在介入措施後，實驗組平均的疼痛分數明顯的比控制組的低，(實驗組2.9±1.2，控制組5.4±2.2；p<0.001)另外也觀察到實驗組與控制組的疼痛分數，於介入措施前後的平均數據有明顯的差異(實驗組4.5±1.9，控制組1.39±2.0； p<0.001)，二組之間疼痛的嚴重程度也有明顯的降低(p<0.001)。結論：非侵入性中周波穴位刺激對原發性痛經的婦女，可以減輕經期的疼痛，因此對於患有原發性痛經的婦女，可提供另一項非侵入性治療之選擇。關鍵字：痛經、穴位電刺激、穴位、針灸止痛[[abstract]]This study aimed to evaluate effects of non-invasive acupoint stimulation therapy with middle frequency electrical waves on dysmenorrhea in women.Methods: We conducted a randomized controlled trial enrolling 66 gynecology patients with primary dysmenorrhea, which was defined as painful menstruation without pelvic pathology (secondary dysmenorrhea). Pathology was ruled out by gynecological ultrasound examination, and serum concentration of CA-125. Subjects were randomly assigned to an experimental group (n=34) and control group (n=32). Main outcome measures included McGill Questionnaire Short-form and numerical rating scale for pain intensity, Acupuncture-like trancutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (AL-TENS) of middle-frequency (1000Hz-10,000Hz) was applied at Hegu and Sanyinjiao points in the experimental group twice weekly for 8 weeks; the control group received AL-TENS on non-acupoints. Pre- and post-intervention results were recorded.Results: Prior to AL-TENS intervention, no significant differences were found in pain scale and pain intensity between experimental and control groups. After AL-TENS intervention, average total pain score in experimental group was significantly lower than control group (experimental group 2.9±1.2, control group 5.4±2.2; P<0.001). Significant differences were observed between experimental and control groups in average change in pain scores between pre- and post- intervention (experimental group 4.5±1.9, control group 1.39±2.0; P<0.001). Pain severity at post-intervention was also significantly different between groups (P