Acupuncture is a key part of traditional Chinese Medicine, dating back to as early as 200 BC. It was believed to improve circulation of blood and bodily fluids, by controlling the flow of qi through the body. There have been several studies done on the effectiveness of acupuncture in modern medicine, with very positive results. However, pain is a part of acupuncture since it involves the use of needles. However, the use of ultrasound has been proven to be a similarly effective alternative.
The use of FUS
Focused ultrasound (FUS) has been used in medical intervention for several years now, with pilot studies done on different cases, from fractures to lower extremity ulcers. Like diagnostic sonography, FUS uses high frequency vibrations or “sound waves”, which travel through the body.
FUS delivers lower or higher vibration energy to very specific parts of the body for therapeutic value, typically promoting healing. The transducer used in FUS is very different from a normal sonogram, only stimulating on one point or around 1 mm3 of tissue. You can read more about different sonography procedures in Lisa’s articles.
FUS delivers lower or higher vibration energy to very specific parts of the body for therapeutic value, typically promoting healing. The transducer used in FUS is very different from a normal sonogram, only stimulating on one point or around 1 mm3 of tissue. You can read more about different sonography procedures in Lisa’s articles.
Acupuncture vs. ultrasound
While acupuncture has been proven effective in improving the circulation in specific areas of the body, the needle causes pain and damages the skin. With FUS, the procedure is entirely non-invasive, sending vibrations through the skin and to the affected tissue. It does not risk infection or tissue damage, and the patient does not feel any pain. However, both procedures claim to do the same thing – improve blood flow and circulation to the affected area.
In a study done in Japan, 50 volunteers were included in the study. The study was a true experimental study, with a randomized control group and an experimental group. The results of the study were very positive, with the experimental group experiencing no decrease in blood flow during the procedure. The control group experienced a significant decrease in blood flow volume when acupuncture was done. Both groups experienced a very significant increase in blood flow volume after 180 seconds, signifying the effectiveness of both procedures.
In a study done in Japan, 50 volunteers were included in the study. The study was a true experimental study, with a randomized control group and an experimental group. The results of the study were very positive, with the experimental group experiencing no decrease in blood flow during the procedure. The control group experienced a significant decrease in blood flow volume when acupuncture was done. Both groups experienced a very significant increase in blood flow volume after 180 seconds, signifying the effectiveness of both procedures.
Conclusion
As the study revealed, FUS was just as effective as acupuncture when it comes to improving the circulation of blood. This makes it a very effective alternative to patients who cannot tolerate pain, or do not want to risk infection of bleeding which, although rare, does happen in acupuncture. Sonography has a wide variety of uses that go beyond simple diagnostics. It is an important therapeutic tool that can manage a number of diseases and has room for more studies to be done regarding its capabilities.