Moxibustion Combined With Wuqinxi For Relieving Neck Pain In Cervical Spondylosis: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Evidence has shown that moxibustion and wuqinxi can relieve neck pain respectively, however the combined effect of the two treatments is still unclear. This study aim to investigate the alleviating effect of moxibustion combined with wuqinxi exercises on neck pain in patients with cervical spondylosis.Methods: One hundred patients with neck pain due to cervical spondylosis were screened and randomly equally divided into a moxibustion group (MG), a wuqinxi group (WG), a combination group (receiving moxibustion combined with wuqinxi) (MW), and a control group (CG). The MG received moxibustion for 20 min each time; the WG were required to practice wuqinxi for 20 min each time; the MW received moxibustion and practiced wuqinxi; and the CG were treated after the trial. The frequency of treatment was five times per week. The primary outcome measured was the change in the simple McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ) score between pre- and post-intervention measurements.Results: There were no significant differences at baseline among the four groups. After the intervention, the MPQ scores of the MG (6.9±3.9), WG (7.6±3.6), and MW (4.6±2.7) were significantly lower than that of the CG (16.4±4.3). The MPQ score decreased by 10.0±6.3 in the MG, 11.3±6.8 in the WG, 13.1±5.2 in the MW, and −0.2±3.0 in the CG. There were no significant differences in the change in MPQ score between the MW, MG and WG. The neck disability index (NDI), Self-rating Anxiety Scale (SAS), and Self-rating Depression Scale (SDS) scores of the MG, WG, and MW all decreased, but those of the CG did not change significantly. In comparison with the MG and WG, the changes in the NDI, SAS, and SDS scores of the MW were not significantly different.Conclusion: Our study suggests that four weeks of moxibustion or wuqinxi can alleviate symptoms of neck pain in patients with cervical spondylosis. However, the effect of moxibustion combined with wuqinxi was no better than that of moxibustion or wuqinxi alone.Trial registration: ChiCTR2000034258. Retrospectively registered: 29/06/2020.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".