OBSERVATION AND RESULTS

The study entitled “Effect of panchatikta Taila Matra Basti in

the patients suffering from Katishula vis-a vis Lumbar Spondylosis.”

was planned to evaluate effect of Panchatikta Taila on the patient of

Katishula. For that Panchatikta Taila Matra Basti along with Madhu

was given to one group comprising 20 patients of Katishula for 9

days. This group of treatment was termed as Group A. To compare

the effect of Madhu in Matra Basti, another group comprising 20

patients of Katishula was given Panchatikta Taila Matra Basti for 9

days. This group was termed as Group B.

Prior to start of the study in both groups, patients selected for

study were closely observed for a period of two days. In this period of

observation detailed history of patients was evaluated as per Performa

of case record form mentioned in the ending of materials and methods.

In these two days, all investigations were carried out and these values

were termed as before treatment. As well as the status of the patient

was also recorded with respect to symptoms and signs found in the

patient of Katishula of this series.

After completion of duration all the required investigations of all

the patients from both groups were again done. All these values were

recorded and termed as after treatment values. The status of all the

symptoms and signs were also recorded after completion of treatment.

94
Thus the change in the status of symptoms, signs and investigations

were recorded. The history recorded in this study on case record form,

revealed the facts and findings, which are presented herewith in the

tabular form. Some of them are highlighted with the help of graphical

presentations.

TABLE-9
Table Showing Age-wise distribution of 40 patients of KATISHULA
Sr. Age Group Group A Group B Total No. Percentage
No. Patients
No. % No. %
of of
pts. pts
1) Balyavasta 00 00 00 00 00

(0-16yrs.)
2) Tarunavasta 09 45 10 50 19 47.5

(17-40yrs.)
3) Praudhavasta 11 55 10 50 21 52.5

(41-60 yrs.)

. Ayurvedic concept of age is somewhat different with respect to

modern science.Age group as described by Sharangdhara was

considered in this study. In the present study maximum number of

patients (52.5%) were from the praudha-Avastha of Age while, 47.5%

patients were from taruna avasta (Table 9).

94
 TABLE-10

Table Showing Sex-wise distribution of 40 patients of KATISHULA

Sr. Sex Group A Group B Total No. Percentage
No. Patients
No. % No. %
of of
pts. pts
1) Male 6 30 8 40 14 35
2) Female 14 70 12 60 26 65

Table-10 reveals that maximum numbers of patients (65%) were

female whereas 35% of patients were male.

TABLE-11

Table Showing Religion -wise distribution of 40 patients of

KATISHULA

Sr. Religion Group A Group B Total No. Percentage

No. Patients
No. % No. %
of of
pts. pts
1) Hindu 19 95 18 90 37 92.5

2) Muslim 01 05 00 00 1 2.5

3) Christian 00 00 02 10 2 5.0

94
 Table-11 data reveals that maximum number of patients (92.5%)

were from Hindu religion, followed by 5% from Christian religion

whereas 2.5% from Muslim religion.

TABLE-12

Table Showing Economical status of 40 patients of KATISHULA

Sr. Economical Group A Group B Total No. Percentage

No. status Patients
No. % No. %
of of
pts. pts
1) Poor 02 10 01 05 03 7.5

2) Middle class 18 90 18 90 36 90

3) Rich 00 00 01 05 01 2.5

90% of patients in Group A and 90% of Group B were found to

be Middle-class income group. However 10% from Group Aand 5%

from Group B were found to be Lower class group. While only 5% of

higher class noted from Group B. (Table 12)

TABLE-13

Table Showing Educational status of 40 patients of KATISHULA

Sr. Educational Group A Group B Total No. Percentage

No. status Patients
No. % No. %

94
 of of
pts. pts
1) Uneducated 01 05 03 15 04 10
Educated up
2) 09 45 07 35 16 40
to SSC
3) HSC 04 20 03 15 7 17.5

4) Graduate 06 30 07 35 13 32.5

In this series 05% people from Group A and15% from Group B

were found to be uneducated. Remaining patients were educated up to

different level of education. In that 45% in Group A and 35% in Group

B were found to be educated up to HSC. While 30% in Group A and

35% in Group B, were found to be graduate people.

TABLE-14

Table Showing Chronicity of disease of 40 patients of KATISHULA

Group A Group B
Sr. Chronicity No. No. Total No.
Percentage
No. of disease of % of % Patients
pts. pts
1) 0-1 yrs 09 45 08 40 17 42.5
2) 1-5 yrs 06 30 07 35 13 32.5
3) 5-10 yrs 04 20 04 20 08 20
4) <10 yrs 01 5 01 5 02 5

In this maximum patient (42.5%) have symptoms since last

1year back.32.5%have same symptom since 5 years.20% patients

94
have same complaint since 10 years and rest 5% since more than 10

years.

TABLE-15

Table Showing Marital status of 40 patients of KATISHULA

Sr. Group A Group B

No. Family Total No.
No. % No. % Percentage
History of of Patients
pts. pts
1) Unmarried 01 05 00 00 01 2.5
2) Married 18 90 19 95 37 92.5
3) Widow 01 05 01 05 02 05
4) Widower 00 00 00 00 00 00

In above table only 5% were unmarried, maximum i.e.90% in

Group A and 95% in Group B were married. Only 5% were widow in

each group

TABLE-16

Table Showing Dominant Rasa in Ahar of 40 patients of

KATISHULA

95
Sr. Group A Group B Total No. Percentage
No. Dominant Patients
Rasa in No. % No. %
Ahar of of
pts. pts
1) Madhur 12 60 10 50 22 55
2) Amla 12 60 15 75 27 67.5
3) Lavan 05 25 08 40 13 32.5
4) Katu 19 95 18 90 37 92.5
5) Tikta 08 40 08 40 16 40
6) Kashaya 03 15 01 05 04 10
Ayurveda bestowed the importance of diet having all six types of

Rasa.Most of the Ayurvedic physicians of ancient era opined that the

diet having six types of Rasa should be ingested. People may have the

habit of consuming one or two particular Rasas excessively and then

may produce diseases related to it.

It was revealed that 95%of peoples in Group As and 90% Group

B were having the habit of ingesting food having Katu rasa. Some of

them had having habit of taking excess Madhura and Amla Rasa, they

were 60% in Group A and 50% and 75% in Group B. Incidance of

Tikta,Kashay and Lavana rasa also noted as shown in the table 16.

TABLE-17

Table Showing Type of Food Ingested by of 40 patients of

KATISHULA

Sr. Type of Group A Group B Total No. Percentage

94
No. Patients
Food No. % No. %
Ingested of of
pts. pts
1) Vegetarian 06 30 08 40 14 35

3) Mixed 14 70 12 60 26 65

The above table shows that more patients were having mixed

diet (70% in Group A and 60% in group B).Rest of having Vegetarian

diet (30% in Group A and 40% in group B).

TABLE-18

Table showing dominant Guna in ahara by 40 patients of

KATISHULA

Sr. Group A Group B Total No. Percentage

No. Dominant Patients
Guna in No. % No. %
Ahar of of
pts. pts
1) Ushna 06 30 07 35 13 32.5
2) Shita 14 70 13 65 27 67.5
3) Laghu 14 70 12 60 26 65
4) Guru 06 30 08 40 14 35
5) Snigdha 08 40 09 45 17 42.5
6) Ruksha 12 60 11 55 23 57.5
7) Veg.oil 20 100 20 100 40 100
8) Ghee 03 15 05 25 08 20

94
 In this study, maximum patients were taking shita and Laghu

guna pradhan ahara. All patients were used veg.oil in their ahara.

TABLE-19

Table Showing Vyasana of 40 patients of KATISHULA

Sr. Group A Group B Total No. Percentage

No. Patients
Vyasana No. % No. %
of of
pts. pts
1) Madyapana 01 05 02 10 03 7.5
2) Tobacco 05 25 07 35 12 30
3) Tea/Coffee 19 95 20 100 39 97.5
4) Smoking 01 05 03 15 04 10
5) None 01 05 00 00 01 2.5

In this study, maximum patients were addicted to bad habit. It

shows maximum patient was addicted to Tea or Coffee. Tobacco

chewing was next to it with 25% in Group A and 35% in Group B.

Smoking and Madyapana were 05% in Group A and 15%, 10% in

Group B respectively.

TABLE-20

Table Showing Type of Work done by 40 patients of KATISHULA

Sr. Type of Group A Group B Total No. Percentage

94
No. Work No. No. Patients
of % of %
pts. pts
1) Sedentary 06 30 08 40 14 35
2) Standing 03 15 03 15 06 15
3) Sitting 04 20 02 10 06 15
4) Labor 07 35 07 35 14 35

The type of work done by the patient is also as important as

Aahar concept narrated by the Acharya Charak. Therefore the history

of work done by patients was pinpointed.

It is observed that the standing type of work done by patients of

Katishula in the both groups was 15% and the sitting type of work done

by the patient’s was 20% in Group A and 10% in Group B as shown in

the table 20. The maximum patients 35% in the both groups was found

to be laborious worker. In the above study 30% in Group A and 40% in

Group B of patients having sedentary type of work

TABLE-21

Table showing Sara Parikshana by 40 patients of KATISHULA

Sr. Group A Group B Total No. Percentage

No. Sara Patients
No. % No. %
Parikshana of of
pts. pts

94
1) Avara 06 30 05 25 11 27.5
2) Madhyam 11 55 12 60 23 57.5
3) Pravara 03 15 03 15 06 15

In this study, maximum patients were Madhyam Sara (57.5%).

Only 15% patient’s were Pravara Sara as shown in table.

TABLE-22

Table Showing Doshaj Prakriti in 40 patients of KATISHULA

Group A Group B
Sr. Doshaj No. No. Total No.
Percentage
No. Prakriti of % of % Patients
pts. pts
1) Vata-Pittaja 09 45 10 50 19 42.5
2) Pitta-Kaphaja 03 15 04 20 07 17.5
3) Kapha-Vataja 08 40 06 30 14 35

Prakruti parikshan is the basic concept of Ayurved and it has

much more importance in Chikitsa.In above table 45% of Group A and

50% of Group B constituted Vata-Pittaja type Prakriti.The incidence for

Pitta-Kaphaja was 15% and 20% patients of Group A and Group B

respectively. 40% and 30% patients of Group A and Group B

respectively in Kapha-Vataja type of Prakriti.

TABLE-23

94
 Table Showing Samhanana of 40 patients of KATISHULA
Group A Group B
Sr. No. No. Total No.
Samhanana Percentage
No. of % of % Patients
pts. pts
1) Avar 05 25 06 30 11 27.5
2) Madhyam 11 55 11 55 22 55
3) Pravara 04 20 03 15 07 17.5

TABLE-24

Table Showing Satva-Bala of 40 patients of KATISHULA

Group A Group B
Sr. No. No. Total No.
Satva-Bala Percentage
No. of % of % Patients
pts. pts
1) Avar 06 30 05 25 11 27.5

2) Madhyam 11 55 12 60 23 57.5

3) Pravara 03 15 03 15 06 15

TABLE-25
Table Showing Vyayama Shakti Parikshana of 40 patients of
KATISHULA

94
 Group A Group B
Sr. Vyayama No. No. Total No.
Percentage
No. Shakti of % of % Patients
pts. pts
1) Avar 04 20 03 15 07 17.5
2) Madhyam 11 55 11 55 22 55
3) Pravara 05 25 06 30 11 27.5

TABLE-26
Table Showing Akrititaha Parikshana of 40 patients of KATISHULA
Group A Group B
Sr. No. No. Total No.
Akriti Percentage
No. of % of % Patients
pts. pts
1) Krisha 07 35 08 40 15 37.5
2) Madhyam 10 50 09 45 19 47.5
3) Sthula 03 15 03 15 06 15

TABLE-27
Table Showing Deshatah Parikshana of 40 patients of KATISHULA
Group A Group B
Sr. No. No. Total No.
Deshatah Percentage
No. of % of % Patients
pts. pts
1) Anupa 10 50 08 40 18 45.5
2) Jangla 06 30 07 35 13 32.5
3) Sadharana 04 20 05 25 09 22.5

94
 TABLE-28
Table Showing Ahar-Shakti Parikshana of 40 patients of
KATISHULA
Group A Group B
Sr. No. No. Total No.
Ahar-Shakti Percentage
No. of % of % Patients
pts. pts
A) Abhyavaharana Shakti
1) Avar 04 20 03 15 07 17.5
2) Madhyam 14 70 12 60 26 65
3) Pravara 02 10 05 25 07 17.5
B) Jaran-Shakti
1) Avar 05 25 05 25 10 25
2) Madhyam 13 65 10 50 23 57.5
3) Pravara 02 10 05 25 07 17.5
C) Agni
1) Visham 08 40 06 30 14 35
2) Tikshna 03 15 02 10 05 12.5
3) Manda 02 10 03 15 05 12.5
4) Madhyam 07 35 09 45 16 40

Dashavidha – Parikshana :
All the patients included in this study were examined with

respect to Ashtavidha, Dashavidha, Strotasa etc. Parikshana.

94
Dashvidha parikshana such as Prakruti, Sara, etc. help to have the

idea regarding of the dominance of Bala, of the patients.

In this series Dvandva type of Prakruti was encounted which is

mention before.

Most of the patients are having Madhyam type of Samhanan

(55% of Group A and Group B as per Table- 23). In this study Satva

was also investigated. Maximum number patients (about 55 % of

Group A and 60%of Group B) having Madhyam type of Satva already

shown in Table – 24)

Vyamshakti is nothing but the work. A parameter which gives

idea about Deha Bala. In the Katishula, Bala of patients which depends

on Dhatu-Saratva is reduced. Maximum patients of this series had

Madhyam Vyam Shakti(55% in both group), which had been indicated

in table-25.

Examination of Agni:

Examination of status of Agni is one of the important factors, as

Proper Agni is essential for the metabolism. Therefore it is at most

important to have the idea regarding the status of Agni of patients of

Katishula. The patients registered; in this series were investigated with

respect to Abyavaran Shakti, Jaran Shakti. It was noted that 70%

patients in Group A and 60% in Group B had Madhyam Abhyavaran

95
Shakti, while that of 65% of Group A and 50% of Group B having

Madhyam type of Jaran shakti. Also it can be noted that 20% of Group

A and 25% of Group B patients having Pravara Abhyavaran shakti and

only 10% and 25% respectively having Pravara Jaran shakti. It means

that peoples of Katishula were more likely goes towards Mithya-ahar.

Examination of Sthulata Krishata exclusively principles of

management of Katishula, depends upon Sthulata and Krishata of

Patients. In this series 50% patients of treated, and 45% patients of

controlled having Madhayam Akruti; Krisha was noted in 35% and 40%

patients of Group A and Group B respectively. (Table – 26)

About 50% of Group A and 40% of controlled patients was found

to be residential of Anupa Desh, 30% and 35% patients of Group A and

Group B was found to be residential of Jangala Desh as per shown in

Table – 27.

96
 TABLE-29
Showing Incidence of main Vyadhi Ghataka involved 40 patients
of KATISHULA
Vyadhi Group A Group B
Sr. Ghatak Total No. Percentag
No. No.
No. involved Patients e
of % of %
pts. pts
A) Dosha-Involved
Vata-
1) 20 100 20 100 40 100
Dominance
Pitta-
2) 12 60 09 45 21 52.5
Dominance
Kapha-
3) 04 20 05 25 09 22.5
Dominance
B) Dhatu-Involved
1) Rasa Dhatu 06 30 05 15 11 27.5
2) Rakta Dhatu 11 55 13 65 24 60
Mamsa
3) 05 25 03 15 08 20
Dhatu
4) Meda Dhatu 03 15 04 20 07 17.5
5) Asthi Dhatu 20 100 20 100 40 100
6) Majja Dhatu 12 60 11 55 23 57.5
7) Shukra 00 00 00 00 00 00

98
 Dhatu
C) Strotas Involved
1) Rasa-vaha 12 60 10 50 22 55
2) Rakta-vaha 09 45 09 45 18 45
3) Mamsa-vaha 05 25 05 25 10 25
4) Meda-vaha 03 15 03 15 06 15
5) Asthi-vaha 20 100 20 100 40 100
6) Majja-vaha 20 100 18 90 38 95

Concept of Vyadhi in Ayurveda is unique, which deals with

Dosha, Dushya, Srotas and particular region on the body. Katishula is

generalized disease in which whole body is affected.

Incidence for Dosha dushti:

Incidence for involvement of Dosha was evaluated with the help

of Dosha-Vruddhi Laxanas. In this study 100% of patients in the both

groups exhibited dominance of Vata Dushti Laxanas. Dominance of

Pitta dushti was found in 60% in Group A and 45% in group B of

Katishula, while that Kapha dominance was found to be 20% and 25%

in Group A and Group B respectively. (Table 21)

Incidence for Dhatu Dushti:

99
 In this study it was observed that Asthi Dhatu Dushti was

observed in all patients of both the groups. Mamsa Dushti was found in

25% of Group A and 15% of Group B of patients. 55% of Group A and

65% of Group B of patients is found to be Dushti in Rakta Dhatu also.

60% of Group A and 55% of Group B of patients is found to be Majja

Dhatu Dushti.

Involvement of Srotasa:

In this study Asthivaha Srotas were involved in all patients of

both the groups.100% and 90% of patients in Group A and Group B

was found to be Dushti in Majjavaha Srotas respectively.

45% in Raktavaha Strotas,25% in Mansavaha Strotas and 15%

in Medavaha Strotas Dushti were found in both group respectively.

TABLE-30

Table Showing Effect of Symptoms Score of 40 Patients of

Katishula

Group A Group B
Sr.
Symptom Differe Percent Differ Percent
No.
BT AT nce age of BT AT ence age of
Relief Relief
1 Katishula 46 16 30 65.21 48 25 23 47.91

94
 Akunchan
2 Prasaranyoh 36 10 26 72.22 37 16 21 56.75
Shula
Pidanasahat
3 38 11 27 71.05 38 16 22 57.89
va
Shulasya
4 31 11 20 64.51 36 14 22 61.11
Kala

5 Anidra 30 5 25 83.33 28 9 19 67.85

Effect of Therapy on symptoms Score:

It was observed that overall percentage of relief was more in

Group A than Group B. The symptoms such as katishala, Akunchan

Prasaranyoh Shula, pidansahatva, shulasya kala, anidra etc. were

studied in this series as described in Table

TABLE-31

Table Showing Effect on Symptoms of 20 Patients of Katishula of

Group A group by Wilcoxon-Matched –Pairs-Signed-Ranks Test

Sum of
Sr. All No.of
Symptom Mean SD SEd Z P
no Signed Pairs
Ranks
1 Katishula
BT 2.3 0.4702 0.1052
AT 0.8 0.5231 0.117 210 20 3.919 <0.001
Diff. 1.5 0.513 0.1148

94
2. Akunchan
Prasaranyoh
Shula
BT 1.8 0.5231 0.117
210 20 3.919 <0.001
AT 0.5 0.607 0.1358
Diff 1.3 0.4702 0.1052
3. Pidanasahatva
BT 1.9 0.5525 0.1236
210 20 3.919 <0.001
AT 0.55 0.6048 0.1353
Diff 1.35 0.4894 0.1095
4. Shulasya Kala
BT 1.55 0.6048 0.1353
120 15 3.407 <0.001
AT 0.55 0.6048 0.1353
Diff 1 0.7255 0.1623
5. Anidra
BT 1.5 0.513 0.1148
171 18 3.72 <0.001
AT 0.25 0.4443 0.0994
Diff. 1.25 0.6387 0.1429

Statistical Analysis of the Effect of Therapy on Symptoms of

Katishula of Group A by Wilcoxon-Matched –Pairs Signed Ranks

Test:

Katishula: Sum of all signed ranks was 210.The number of pairs were

20. Z value was 3.9199, which was statistically very highly significant,

P<0.001 (Table-31)

Akunchan Prasaranyoh Shula: Sum of all signed ranks was 210.The

number of pairs were 20. Z value was 3.9199, which was statistically

very highly significant, P<0.001 (Table-31)

94
 Pidansahatva :- Sum of all signed ranks was 210.The number of pairs

were 20. Z value was 3.9199, which was statistically very highly

significant, P<0.001 (Table-31)

Shulasya Kala: Sum of all signed ranks was 120.The numbers of pairs

were 15. Z value was 3.407, which was statistically very highly

significant, P<0.001 (Table-31)

Anidra: Sum of all signed ranks was 171.The numbers of pairs were

18. Z value was 3.72, which was statistically very highly significant,

P<0.001 (Table-31)

TABLE-32

Table Showing Effect on Symptoms of 20 Patients of Katishula of

Group B by Wilcoxon- Matched –Pairs-Signed-Ranks Test

Sum of All
Sr. No.of
Symptom Mean SD SEd Signed Z P
no Pairs
Ranks
1 Katishula
BT 2.4 05026 0.1124
AT 1.25 0.7164 0.1603 190 19 3.82 <0.001
Diff. 1.15 0.4894 0.1095
2. Akunchan
Prasaranyoh
Shula
BT 1.85 0.8127 0.1818 190 19 3.82 <0.001
AT 0.8 0.8335 0.1865
Diff 1.05 0.394 0.0882

94
3. Pidansahatva
BT 1.9 0.7182 0.1607
171 18 3.723 <0.001
AT 0.8 0.9515 0.2129
Diff 1.1 0.5525 0.1236
4. Shulasya
Kala
BT 1.8 0.7678 0.1718 171 18 3.723 <0.001
AT 0.7 0.8013 0.1793
Diff 1.1 0.5525 0.1236
5. Anidra
BT 1.4 0.5026 0.1124
136 16 3.516 <0.001
AT 0.45 0.6048 0.1353
Diff. 0.95 0.6048 0.1353

Statistical Analysis of the Effect of Therapy on Symptoms of

Katishula of Group B by Wilcoxon - Matched –Pairs Signed Ranks

Test

Katishula : Sum of all signed ranks was 190.The number of pairs were

19. Z value was 3.82, which was statistically very highly significant,

P<0.001 (Table-32)

Akunchan Prasaranyoh Shula: Sum of all signed ranks was 190.The

numbers of pairs were 19. Z value was 3.82, which was statistically

very highly significant, P<0.001 (Table-32)

Pidansahatva: Sum of all signed ranks was 171.The numbers of pairs

were 18. Z value was 3.723, which was statistically very highly

significant, P<0.001 (Table-32)

94
 Shulasya Kala: Sum of all signed ranks was 171.The numbers of pairs

were 18. Z value was 3.723, which was statistically very highly

significant, P<0.001 (Table-32)

Anidra: Sum of all signed ranks was 136.The number of pairs were

16. Z value was 3.5162, which was statistically very highly significant,

P<0.001 (Table-32)

TABLE-33

Table Showing Comparison between two groups with respect to

Symptoms Score by Mann-Whitney test

Sr. Mean ±
Symptom R1 Mean U SD Z P
no 1.96SD
120.25-
1 Katishula 455 190 135 35.59 1.53 >0.05
259.75
Akunchan
120.25-
2. Prasaranyoh 437 190 153 35.59 1.32 >0.05
259.75
Shula
112.96-
3. Pidansahatva 413 180 157 34.20 0.65 >0.05
247.032
Shulasya 96.682-
4. 270 135 120 19.55 0.741 >0.05
Kala 173.31
87.2-
5. Anidra 344 144 115 28.98 0.983 >0.05
200.80

94
 Comparison between two groups with respect to symptom score

was statistically evaluated by Mann-Whitney test. There is no

significant difference was found in two groups.

95
 TABLE- 34

Table Showing Effect on Physical Parameters of 40 Patients of

KATISHULA

Physical Mean ± SD Mean of

Sr. SEd t P
No Parameters Diff.
. BT AT
± SD

Angle of Flexion
(in deg.)
1 94.75 ± 104.25 ± 9.5
Group A 10.696 11.728 ±3.203 0.716 13.255 <0.001
Group B 90.25 ± 97.5 ± 7.25 ± 0.849 8.537 <0.001
11.751 11.865 3.795

Angle of
Extension (in
deg) 19.25 ± 6.5 ±
2
Group A 4.375 25 ± 4.588 2.350 0.525 12.359 <0.001
Group B 18.75± 25 ± 3.973 6.25 ± 0.615 10.156 <0.001
4.8327 2.75

Distance
Between Ground
And Middle
Finger of Patient
3
(in cm) 19.45 4.15 ±
15.3±5.212
±4.8175 1.496 0.334 12.396 <0.001
Group A 17.15 ±
21.1 ± 3.95 ± 0.5001 7.8983 <0.001
Group B 4.837
5.702 2.235

96
Effect of therapy on physical parameters was statistically

evaluated by Paired t test as follows.

Angle of Flexion: The mean Angle of flexion in Group A before

starting the treatment was 94.75 ± 10.696 which increase up

to104.25±11.728.Increase in Angle of Flexion by 9.5 ±3.203 was tested

statistically by paired ‘t’ test, t was 13.255 which was very highly

significant, P<0.001(Table-34)

In the same manner Angle of Flexion in Group B also increased

by 7.25 ± 3.795 of which t was 8.537 and was very highly significant,

P<0.001 (Table-34)

Angle of Extension: Angle of Extension of Group A increased from

19.25 ± 4.375 to 25 ± 4.588. Increase in Angle of Extension by 6.5 ±

2.350 was statistically very highly significant because t was 12.359,

P<0.001(table-34)

In case of Group B Angle of Extension increased from 18.75 ±

4.8327 to 25 ± 3.973. Increase in Angle of Extension by 6.25 ± 2.75

was statistically very highly significant because t was 10.156, P<0.001

Distance Between Ground And Middle Finger of Patient: Distance

between Ground and Middle Finger of Patient of Group A reduced from

19.45 ± 4.8175 to 15.3 ± 5.212. Decrease in Distance between Ground

97
and Middle Finger of Patient by 4.15 ± 1.496 was statistically very

highly significant because t was 12.396, P<0.001(table-34)

In case of Group B Distance Between Ground And Middle

Finger of Patient reduced from21.1 ± 5.702 to 17.15 ± 4.837.Decrease

in Distance Between Ground And Middle Finger of Patient by 3.95 ±

2.235 was statistically very highly significant because t was 7.898,

P<0.001

TABLE- 35

Table Showing Effect on Haematological Parameters of 40

Patients of Katishula by Paired t Test

98
 Haematolo
Mean ± SD
Sr. gical Mean of SEd t P
No Parameters Diff.± SD
BT AT

Haemoglob 11.685 11.895

in ± ± 0.21 ± 0.11 1. >0.
1.2209 1.1264 0.5004 19 875 05
1
Group A
11.755 11.99 0.235 ± 0.15 1.54 >0.
Group B ± ± 0.68 21 47 05
1.1865 1.2809

ESR 28.5 ± 26.75

1.75 ± 0.90 1.94 >0.
7.8639 ±
4.0246 03 36 05
2 Group A 6.9953
30.25
1.45 ± 0.96 1.49 >0.
Group B ± 28.8 ±
4.3222 69 95 05
7.3044 6.8333
Serum.Calc
8.685 9.0425
ium 0.357 ± 0.18 1.88 >0.
± ±
0.8459 92 90 05
3 0.825 0.6904
Group A
0.13 ± 0.07 1.74 >0.
8.23 ± 8.36 ±
Group B 0.3326 44 70 05
0.6449 0.6159
Serum.Alka
line 63.69
62.1 ±
Phosphata ± 1.591 ± 1.29 >0.
13.095 1.22
ge 17.322 5.800 7 05
5
5
58.54
Group A 58.58 0.039 ± 0.52 >0.
± 0.07
± 2.32 0 05
4.153
Group B 3.876

Effect of Therapy on Hematological Parameters:

Hemoglobin: Hemoglobin slightly increased by 0.21 ± 0.5004 in Group

A, paired t was 1.875 and was insignificant. In Group B it was

increased by 0.235 ± 0.68. Paired t was 1.5447 which was also

insignificant. (Table - 35)

99
ESR: ESR decreased by 1.75 ± 4.0246 in Group A, paired t was 1.94

and was insignificant. In Group B it decreased by 1.45 ± 4.322. Paired t

was 1.4995 which was also insignificant. (Table - 35)

Serum Calcium: Sr.Calcium increased by 0.3575 ± 0.8459 in Group

A, paired t was 1.8890 and was insignificant. In Group B it was

increased by 0.13 ± 0.3326. Paired t was 1.7470 which was also

insignificant. (Table-35

Serum Alkaline Phosphatage: Sr.Alkaline Phosphatage decreased

by 1.591 ± 5.800 in Group A, paired t was 1.225 and was insignificant.

In Group B it was decreased by 0.039 ± 2.32. Paired t was 0.07 which

was also insignificant. (Table - 35)

TABLE-36

100
 Table Showing Effect on Lipid profile Parameters of 40 Patients of

Katishula by Paired t Test

Lipid Mean ± SD
Profile Mean
Sr. SEd t P
Paramete of Diff.
No BT AT
rs ± SD

Cholester
178.69 ±
ol 173.465 5.225 ± <0.0
35.8741 1.854 2.8
± 36.29 8.2879 5
1 1 180
Group A
180.4
172.5 ± 7.90 ± <0.0
3± 2.845 2.77
Group B 31.375 12.720 5
36.927

Triglyceri 10.215 >0.0

127.38
de 137.595 ± 5.183 1.97 5
± 73.32
± 80.222 23.171 8 05
2
Group A 8 >0.0
126.975
136.64 ± 5.033 1.92 5
±
Group B 66. 7708 9.67 ± 1 12
72.6947
22.49
HDL
32.267 ± 35.46 ± 3.193 ± <0.0
1.417 2.25
5.7796 6.9766 6.3364 5
3 Group A 5 25
33.084 ± 30.18 ± 2.89 ± <0.0
Group B 1.154 2.50
6.2411 4.90 5.15 5

153.03 4.969 ±
LDL 148.06 ±
± 13.487 3.017 1.64 >0.0
36.58
38.1890 2 68 5
4 Group A
3.4765
147.483
144.006 ± 2.659 1.30 >0.0
Group B ±
5± 11.887 3 72 5
28.8153
29.277 4

101
 25.222
VLDL 27.095 ± 1.8725 >0.0
± 1.353 1.38
15.5057 ± 5
16.2808 3 36
5 Group A 6.0494
25.5455 >0.0
23.9355 1.182 1.36
Group B ± 1.61 ± 5
± 5 15
15.0714 5.2828
11.7790

Effect of Therapy on Lipid Prpfile Parameters:-

Cholesterol: Cholesterol of Group A decreased from 178.69 ±

35.8741 to 173.465 ± 36.2945.Decrease in cholesterol by 5.225 ±

8.2879, was statistically significant because t was 2.8180, P<0.05

(table-36)

In case of Group B cholesterol slightly decreased from 180.43 ±

36.92 to 172.5 ± 31.375.decrease in cholesterol by 7.90 ± 12.720 was

statistically significant because t was 2.77, P<0.05 (table – 36)

HDL: HDL of Group A increased from 32.267 ± 5.7796 to 35.46 ±

6.9766. Increase in HDL by 3.193 ± 6.3364 was statistically significant

because t was 2.2525, P<0.05 (table-36)

In case of Group B HDL decreased from 33.084 ± 6.2411 to

30.18 ± 4.90. Decrease in HDL by 2.89 ± 5.15 was statistically

insignificant because t was 2.50, P<0.05 (Table-36)

102
Triglyceride: Triglyceride of Group A decreased from 137.59 ± 80.222

to 127.38 ± 73.32. Decrease in Triglyceride by 10.215 ± 23.1718 was

statistically insignificant because t was 1.9705, P>0.05 (table-36)

In case of Group B triglyceride decreased by 136.64 ± 66.7708

was statistically insignificant because t was 1.9212, P>0.05 (table-36)

LDL: LDL increased by 4.969 ± 13.487 in Group A, paired t was

1.6468 which was insignificant. In Group B it increased by 3.4765 ±

11.8874. Paired t was 1.307 which was also insignificant. (Table - 36)

VLDL: - VLDL decreased by1.87 ± 6.0494 in Group A; paired t was

1.38 and was insignificant. In Group B it decreased by 1.61 ± 5.2858.

Paired t was 1.36 and was also insignificant. (Table - 36)

TABLE- 37

Table Showing Variance Ratio Test before Treatment of Physical

Parameters

Before Treatment SD
Sr. Physical
Group A Group B F Ratio P
No Parameters
SD SD
Angle of
1 10.696 11.751 1.20 >0.05
Flexion

Angle of
2 4.375 4.832 1.21 >0.05
Extension

103
 Distance
Between
3 Ground And 4.817 5.702 1.40 >0.05
Middle Finger
of Patient

Variance Ratio Test Before Treatment:-

Variance ratio for Angle of Flexion, Angle of Extension, Distance

between Ground and Middle Finger of Patient, presented in Table-37

showed that there was no significant difference between two groups

with respect to this physical parameters. Therefore further statistical

evaluation was done to see the difference between two groups with

respect to these characters only by unpaired t test

TABLE-38

Table Showing Variance Ratio Test before Treatment of

Lipid Profile Parameters

Before Treatment SD
Sr. Lipid Profile
F Ratio P
No Parameters Group
Group ASD
BSD

1 Cholesterol 35.874 36.927 1.059 >0.05

2 HDL 5.779 6.241 1.16 >0.05

104
 Variance ratio for Cholesterol, HDL in table – 38 showed that

there was no significant difference between two groups with respect to

these lipid profile parameters. Therefore further statistical evaluation

was done to see the difference between two groups with respect to

these characters by unpaired t test.

TABLE-39

Table Showing Comparison between Two Groups by

Unpaired t Test

Mean of Diff. ± SD
Sr. P
Parameters Sed. t
No
Group A Group B

1. Cholesterol 5.225 ± 8.287 7.90 ± 12.720 3.39 0.78 >0.05

2. HDL 3.193±6.336 2.89 ± 5.15 1.825 0.16 >0.05

Angle of
3. 9.5 ± 3.203 7.25 ± 3.795 1.01 2.227 <0.05
Flexion

Angle of
4. 6.5 ± 2.350 6.25 ± 2.75 0.80 0.937 >0.05
Extention

Distance
Between
5. Ground And 4.15 ± 1.496 3.95 ± 2.235 0.60 0.33 >0.05
Middle Finger
of Patient

Comparison between Two Groups:

105
 Comparison between two groups were statistically done by

unpaired t’ test.

Angle of Flexion: Mean of difference in Group A was 9.5 ± 3.203

which was compared with that of mean of difference in Group B. It was

7.25 ± 3.795.Unpaired t was 2.227, P <0.05 which suggested that

difference of mean exhibited by Group A was significant. (Table-39)

Angle of Extension:- Mean of difference in Group A was 6.5 ± 2.350

which was compared with that of mean of difference in Group B. It was

6.25 ± 2.75.Unpaired t was 0.937, P >0.05 which suggested that there

was no significant difference of mean between two groups.(Table-39)

Distance between Ground and Middle Finger of Patient: - Mean of

difference in Group A was 4.15 ± 1.496 which was compared with that

of mean of difference in Group B. It was 3.95 ± 2.235.Unpaired t was

0.33, P >0.05 which suggested that there was no significant difference

of mean between two groups. (Table-39)

Cholesterol: - Mean of difference in Group A was 5.225 ± 8.287 which

was compared with that of mean of difference in Group B. It was 7.90 ±

12.720.Unpaired t was 0.78, P >0.05 which suggested that there was

no significant difference of mean between two groups. (Table-39)

HDL: - Mean of difference in Group A was 3.193 ± 6.3364 which was

compared with that of mean of difference in Group B. It was 2.89 ±

106
5.15.Unpaired t was 0.1660, P >0.05 which suggested that there was

no significant difference of mean between two groups. (Table-39)

Total Effect of Therapy:

Total effect of therapy has been evaluated in terms of cured, markedly

improved, improved and unchanged.

TABLE-40

Table Showing Total Effect of Therapy in 20 Patients of Katishula

of Group A.

Sr. Ave.% of Ave.% of Total Total % Remarks

No. Relief in Relief in of Relief
Symptoms Signs
1 93.3333 104.86 52.4320
11.53069 3 4 1 Markedly Improved
2 76.851 38.4255
16.85102 60 02 1 Improved
3 46.6666 73.435
26.76834 7 01 36.7175 Improved
4 58.838 29.4192
8.838555 50 55 8 Improved
5 93.3333 102.35 51.1778
9.02232 3 57 3 Markedly Improved
6 93.3333 106.92 53.4627
13.59218 3 55 6 Markedly Improved
7 104.34 52.1740
14.34815 90 82 8 Markedly Improved
8 115.02 57.5111
15.02229 100 23 5 Markedly Improved
9 58.936 29.4683
8.936694 50 69 5 Improved
10 9.131983 50 59.131 29.5659 Improved

107
 98 9
11 116.09 58.0477
16.09553 100 55 7 Markedly Improved
12 50.143 25.0719
20.14396 30 96 8 Improved
13 114.38 57.1920
14.38409 100 41 4 Markedly Improved
14 116.33 58.1657
16.33155 100 16 8 Markedly Improved
15 72.038 36.0193
22.03878 50 78 9 Improved
16 111.74 55.8706
21.74125 90 13 3 Markedly Improved
17 76.6666 102.72 51.3641
26.06156 7 82 1 Markedly Improved
18 93.3333 115.38 57.6940
22.05475 3 81 4 Markedly Improved
19 56.368 28.1841
16.36823 40 23 2 Improved
20 65.025 32.5125
25.02518 40 18 9 Improved

TABLE-41

Table Showing Total Effect of Therapy in 20 Patients of Katishula

of Group B.

Sr.No. Ave.% of Ave.% of Total Total % Remarks

Relief in Relief in of Relief
Symptoms Signs
1 104.834 52.4172
14.83455 90 5 7 Markedly Improved
2 100.234
10.23479 90 8 50.1174 Markedly Improved
3 105.894 52.9471
15.89428 90 3 4 Markedly Improved
4 51.7040 25.8520
11.70406 40 6 3 Improved
5 26.2167
32.4335 20 52.4335 5 Improved
6 60.2208 30.1104
23.55416 36.66667 3 1 Improved

108
 7 55.6685 27.8342
15.66856 40 6 8 Improved
8 109.286 54.6431
9.286239 100 2 2 Markedly Improved
9 110.422 55.2113
10.42266 100 7 3 Markedly Improved
10 102.977 51.4886
12.97731 90 3 5 Markedly Improved
11 103.382 51.6910
13.38216 90 2 8 Markedly Improved
12 103.385 51.6926
13.38523 90 2 1 Markedly Improved
13 56.8849 28.4424
6.884963 50 6 8 Improved
14 50.1399 25.0699
33.4733 16.66667 7 8 Improved
15 63.0194 31.5097
13.01946 50 6 3 Improved
16 51.4905 25.7452
11.49058 40 8 9 Improved
17 100.106 50.0530
6.772823 93.33333 2 8 Markedly Improved
18 103.911 51.9558
17.24505 86.66667 7 6 Markedly Improved
19 56.2407 28.1203
19.5741 36.66667 7 8 Improved
20 50.0969 25.0484
13.43026 36.66667 3 6 Improved

TABLE-42

Table Showing Total Effect of Therapy in 40 Patients of Katishula

Sr.No. Total Group A Group B Total

109
 Effect of No. of No.of No. of
% % %
Therpy Pts. Pts. Pts.

1 Cured 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

Markedly
2 11 55% 10 50% 21 52.5%
Improved

3 Improved 09 45% 10 50% 09 47.5%

4 Unchanged 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

In case of Group A 11 patients (55%) were markedly improved

and 09 patients (45%) were improved.

In case of Group B 10 patients (50%) were markedly improved and 10

patients (15%) were improved.

TABLE-43

Table Showing Comparison between Two Groups by Chi-Square

Test

Sr. Group Improved Markedly Total Chi-square

No. improved value

110
 1 Group A (O)=09 (O)=11 20

(E)=9.5 (E)=10.5

0.08

2 Group B (O)=10 (O)=10 20 >0.05

(E)=9.5 (E)=10.5

Comparison between two groups was statistically evaluated by

chi-square test. The value is 0.08 which was statistically insignificant

which suggested that there was no significant difference between two

groups with respect to therapy.

111
112