Evaluation of Improvement Effect of Traditional Chinese Medicine Acupuncture Therapy on Rheumatoid Arthritis Pain Based on Image Recognition Technology

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

Figure 6.

Figure 7.

Figure 8.

Figure 9.

Figure 10.

Figure 11.

Figure 12.

The AUC value of the convolution layer recognition performance

Convolution layer	Characteristic number	Classification performance:AUC
		Mean pooling	Maximization	Variance pooling	Summation	Mean
Zero layer	61	0.59	0.57	0.54	0.57	0.57
Layer 1	125	0.61	0.55	0.58	0.59	0.60
Layer 2	248	0.64	0.60	0.60	0.55	0.58
Layer 3	498	0.67	0.71	0.65	0.57	0.64
Layer 4	498	0.64	0.57	0.59	0.60	0.59

Two groups of patients were treated before and after the esr(mm/1h)

Group	Number	Pretreatment	After treatment
Treatment group	40	67.51±36.71	40.23±29.51**
Control group	40	66.75±35.87	51.32±30.53#

Both groups were treated with CRP(mg/L)

Group	Number	Pretreatment	After treatment
Treatment group	40	22.16±24.08	10.72±11.53**
Control group	40	20.87±23.25	11.67±16.01#

The model data for the test set

Detection value	True value
	1:Abnormality	0:Normal
1:Abnormality	52	24
0:Normal	11	85

Post-treatment DAS28 score

Group	Number	Pretreatment	After treatment
Treatment group	40	6.24±1.13	5.23±0.97**▲▲
Control group	40	6.65±2.03	5.91±1.65#

Two groups of subjects were treated before and after the vas score

Group	Number	Pretreatment	After treatment
Treatment group	40	7.25±2.08	4.43±1.77**▲▲
Control group	40	6.91±1.92	5.16±1.91#

Data of the two groups of participants

Group	Gender		Age (year)	Course (year)
	Male	Female
Treatment group(n=40)	23	17	56.1±9.21	12.04±8.12
Control group(n=40)	27	13	51.42±6.99	11.16±8.13
P value	0.845		0.091	0.711

Clinical symptoms of the two groups were compared

Group	Number	VAS score	Stiffness score	DAS28 score
Treatment group	40	8.52±2.41	3.42±2.23	6.44±0.95
Control group	40	8.14±2.82	3.62±2.02	6.64±1.12
P value		0.41	0.85	0.51

Two groups of patients were treated before and after the test

Group	Number	Pretreatment	After treatment
Treatment group	40	3.27±3.03	1.42±1.30**▲▲
Control group	40	3.65±1.83	2.58±1.91#

The two groups of patients were treated with rf(IU/mL)

Group	Number	Pretreatment	After treatment
Treatment group	40	211.31±251.13	134.27±158.03**▲▲
Control group	40	193.87±212.25	155.64±181.41#

Comparison of the subjects’ routine test indexes

Group	Number	RF (IU/Mi)	CRF (mg/L)	ESR (mm/1h)
Treatment group	40	212.71±245.14	22.23±24.87	67.37±36.87
Control group	40	195.87±211.41	20.06±22.43	66.57±35.85
P value		0.78	0.68	0.789