16: Using the Integrative Neuromuscular Acupoint System for Acupoint Injection Therapy

Published on 22/06/2015 by admin

Filed under Complementary Medicine

Last modified 22/04/2025

Print this page

rate 1 star rate 2 star rate 3 star rate 4 star rate 5 star
Your rating: none, Average: 0 (0 votes)

This article have been viewed 1835 times

CHAPTER 16 Using the Integrative Neuromuscular Acupoint System for Acupoint Injection Therapy

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this chapter is to present the Integrative Neuromuscular Acupoint System (INMAS) to healthcare professionals who have already used injection therapy for pain management.

In the late 1960s, traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) was experiencing an extraordinary period of development, and the leading direction of research in the field, sponsored by the Chinese government, was the integration of TCM with modern medicine. Many new methods were explored to improve the effectiveness of traditional needling and were referred to as “innovative needling-method therapy” (xin zhen liao fa). These new techniques included electrical acupuncture, scalp acupuncture, acupoint implant therapy (surgically implanting foreign material at the acupoints), acupoint tissue extraction therapy (surgically removing fatty tissue from the acupoints), and acupoint injection therapy. In addition, practitioners of Chinese folk medicine were using more than 80 types of needling methods such as eye, nose, wrist-and-ankle needling, and so on.

For injection therapy the Chinese doctors injected about 1cc of a vitamin solution (but not vitamin C, which creates a very painful reaction), and various Chinese herbal extracts at the location of acupoints, and they claimed very good therapeutic results. Like acupuncture anesthesia, this was developed as a move toward the integration of traditional Chinese and modern medicine.

In the United States, Dr. Janet Travell, without previous knowledge of Chinese acupuncture, discovered and published the patterns of pain trigger points in 32 skeletal muscles in 1952.1 The locations of these trigger points basically matched most acupoint locations in the ancient Chinese system. Dr. Travell injected anesthetics (0.5% procaine in physiologic saline) into these trigger points to treat myofascial pain symptoms such as lower back pain. Today the solutions used for injection may include isotonic saline, procaine, lidocaine, Botulinum toxin A (BTA), corticosteroids, and other longer-acting local anesthetics. Some of these injected solutions have some myotoxic effects.

Both the innovative Chinese acupoint injection method and Dr. Travell’s system have their merits. INMAS is a simple and comprehensive method that integrates the Chinese acupuncture channel (meridian) system with Western neuromuscular understanding. All the 20 (or 21) injectable homeostatic acupoints (HAs) that are specified in INMAS match the major acupoints of the ancient 10 channels (meridians) (large intestine, small intestine, stomach, gallbladder, urinary bladder, liver, kidney, lung, spleen, and governor) as well as the major trigger points of the modern neuromuscular system.

TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS OF INJECTION THERAPY

Both acupuncture needling and injection share the same mechanism, which is to create healing-promoting lesions and a harmless temporary foreign body–immune reaction to treat myofascial pain. Injection needles are thicker than acupuncture needles so some technical safety factors should be taken into consideration.

Commonly Used Solutions for Injection Therapy

Since the late 1960s Chinese doctors have used vitamins B1, B6, and B12 for injection into acupoints. U.S. doctors use isotonic saline; local anesthetics such as procaine, lidocaine, and other long-acting anesthetics; corticosteroids; BTA; and epinephrine. Some of these substances are more myotoxic than others.

Isotonic saline can be injected into the HAs for pain relief. A controlled, double-blind comparison between isotonic saline and a myotoxic, long-acting anesthetic (0.5% mepivacaine) showed that isotonic saline offered the same or even better efficacy than mepivacaine.2

Procaine is the least myotoxic among the local anesthetics and is hydrolyzed in the blood. A 1% solution is suitable for injection therapy. This anesthetic blocks nerve conduction by binding to the calcium sites of the cellular membrane of the neuron.

A 1% solution of lidocaine is also used for injection. This anesthetic is longer-acting than procaine but more toxic because it is fat-soluble and is metabolized primarily in the liver.

Corticosteroids are antiinflammatory agents. There is no known controlled study on the effectiveness of steroid injection in comparison with other injected substances, but repeated injections of steroids should be avoided due to known side effects such as atrophy of skin and subcutaneous tissue.

Patients should be told that they may experience loss of sensation for up to 30 minutes after injection.

In general, procaine and lidocaine are the least myotoxic when used at 1% or lower concentrations. Solutions stronger than 1% become significantly myotoxic. Dr. Travell recommended a procaine concentration of 0.5% in physiologic saline, and she found that higher concentrations gave no additional pain relief.3 Longer-acting anesthetics are more myotoxic without appreciable clinical advantage in treating myofascial pain. Local anesthetics at a lower concentration (0.25%) will selectively block small fibers, while higher concentrations will also block the larger A-δ (IIIb and IIIa) fibers.4

Local anesthetics definitely reduce the sensation of soreness and other discomfort immediately after injection. However, evidence shows that the efficacy of injection therapy in pain relief does not depend on any specific properties that these injected substances may possess, but rather on the stimulation effect of the needling used for their injection.5