RESUMO
Objective To observe and compare the clinical efficacies between electroacupuncture and warm needling in treating low back pain.Method Seventy-eight eligible low back pain patients were randomized into group A of 28 cases, group B of 26 cases, and group C of 24 cases. Group A was intervened by electroacupuncture, group B was by warm needling, and group C was by medication. The short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire, Japanese Orthopaedic Association Scores (JOA), and Oswestry Disability Index were observed before and after treatment, and the therapeutic efficacies were compared.Result In group A, the McGill item scores [Sensory Pain Rating Index (S-PRI), Affective Pain Rating Index (A-PRI)] respectively after 1-week and 2-week treatment as well as in the 1-month and 3-month follow-up were significantly different from that before treatment (P<0.01,P<0.05). In group B and C, the McGill item scores after 2-week treatment and in the 1-month and 3-month follow-up were significantly different from that before treatment in the same group (P<0.01,P<0.05). The JOA and Oswestry scores were significantly changed respectively after 1-week and 2-week treatment and in the 1-month and 3-month follow-up in the three groups compared with that before treatment (P<0.05,P<0.01). After 1-week and 2-week treatment and in the 1-month and 3-month follow-up, the JOA and Oswestry scores in group A were significantly different from that in group C (P<0.05,P<0.01). In the 1-month and 3-month follow-up, the JOA scores in group B were significantly different from that in group C (P<0.05). The total effective rate was 85.7% in group A and 73.1% in group B, both significantly higher than 58.3% in group C (P<0.05). Conclusion Electroacupuncture and warm needling both can produce a significant efficacy in treating low back pain, but warm needling acts comparatively slowly and is less safe.