Evaluating efficacy of FUAS based on different classifications
The rates of dysmenorrhea relief (χ2=10.079, P=0.018) and recurrence could be identified by classification 2 in FUAS group (χ2=10.582, P=0.014), but not in FUAS+ group (P>0.05). In addition, other classifications (i.e., classification 1, 3, 4 and 5) could not identify the rates of dysmenorrhea relief and recurrence in both groups (P>0.05, Table 1). The rates of menorrhagia relief could be identified by classification 4 in FUAS group (χ2=16.529, P=0.005), rather than in FUAS+ group. And other classifications (i.e., classification 1, 2, 3 and 5) could not identify the rates of menorrhagia relief (P>0.05, Table 2). Besides, the recurrence rate in FUAS group (22.2.0%) was higher than that in FUAS+ group (12.1%). Furthermore, the poor dysmenorrhea relief rate (17.0%) and the highest recurrence rate (33.0%) were both shown in subtype II of FUAS group based on classification 2, which were significantly higher than those in other subtypes (Table 2, P<0.05).