61
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Acupuncture for musculoskeletal pain: A meta-analysis and meta-regression of sham-controlled randomized clinical trials

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The aims of this systematic review were to study the analgesic effect of real acupuncture and to explore whether sham acupuncture (SA) type is related to the estimated effect of real acupuncture for musculoskeletal pain. Five databases were searched. The outcome was pain or disability immediately (≤1 week) following an intervention. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Meta-regression was used to explore possible sources of heterogeneity. Sixty-three studies (6382 individuals) were included. Eight condition types were included. The pooled effect size was moderate for pain relief (59 trials, 4980 individuals, SMD −0.61, 95% CI −0.76 to −0.47; P < 0.001) and large for disability improvement (31 trials, 4876 individuals, −0.77, −1.05 to −0.49; P < 0.001). In a univariate meta-regression model, sham needle location and/or depth could explain most or all heterogeneities for some conditions (e.g., shoulder pain, low back pain, osteoarthritis, myofascial pain, and fibromyalgia); however, the interactions between subgroups via these covariates were not significant (P < 0.05). Our review provided low-quality evidence that real acupuncture has a moderate effect (approximate 12-point reduction on the 100-mm visual analogue scale) on musculoskeletal pain. SA type did not appear to be related to the estimated effect of real acupuncture.

          Related collections

          Most cited references90

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Introducing a placebo needle into acupuncture research.

          A problem acupuncture research has to face is the concept of a control group. If, in control groups, non-acupoint needling is done, physiological acupuncture effects are implied. Therefore the effects shown in this group are often close to those shown in the acupuncture group. In other trials, control groups have received obviously different treatments, such as transcutaneous electrical nervous stimulation or TENS-laser treatment; it is not clear if the effects of acupuncture are due only to the psychological effects of the treatment. We developed a placebo acupuncture needle, with which it should be possible to simulate an acupuncture procedure without penetrating the skin. In a cross-over experiment with 60 volunteers we tested whether needling with the placebo needle feels any different from real acupuncture. Of 60 volunteers, 54 felt a penetration with acupuncture (mean visual analogue scale [VAS] 13.4; SD 10.58) and 47 felt it with placebo (VAS 8.86; SD 10.55), 34 felt a dull pain sensation (DEQI) with acupuncture and 13 with placebo. None of the volunteers suspected that the needle may not have penetrated the skin. The placebo needle is sufficiently credible to be used in investigations of the effects of acupuncture.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Acupuncture in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomised trial.

            Acupuncture is widely used by patients with chronic pain although there is little evidence of its effectiveness. We investigated the efficacy of acupuncture compared with minimal acupuncture and with no acupuncture in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. Patients with chronic osteoarthritis of the knee (Kellgren grade < or =2) were randomly assigned to acupuncture (n=150), minimal acupuncture (superficial needling at non-acupuncture points; n=76), or a waiting list control (n=74). Specialised physicians, in 28 outpatient centres, administered acupuncture and minimal acupuncture in 12 sessions over 8 weeks. Patients completed standard questionnaires at baseline and after 8 weeks, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks. The primary outcome was the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) index at the end of week 8 (adjusted for baseline score). All main analyses were by intention to treat. 294 patients were enrolled from March 6, 2002, to January 17, 2003; eight patients were lost to follow-up after randomisation, but were included in the final analysis. The mean baseline-adjusted WOMAC index at week 8 was 26.9 (SE 1.4) in the acupuncture group, 35.8 (1.9) in the minimal acupuncture group, and 49.6 (2.0) in the waiting list group (treatment difference acupuncture vs minimal acupuncture -8.8, [95% CI -13.5 to -4.2], p=0.0002; acupuncture vs waiting list -22.7 [-27.5 to -17.9], p<0.0001). After 52 weeks the difference between the acupuncture and minimal acupuncture groups was no longer significant (p=0.08). After 8 weeks of treatment, pain and joint function are improved more with acupuncture than with minimal acupuncture or no acupuncture in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. However, this benefit decreases over time.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The impact of patient expectations on outcomes in four randomized controlled trials of acupuncture in patients with chronic pain.

              In a pooled analysis of four randomized controlled trials of acupuncture in patients with migraine, tension-type headache, chronic low back pain, and osteoarthritis of the knee we investigated the influence of expectations on clinical outcome. The 864 patients included in the analysis received either 12 sessions of acupuncture or minimal (i.e. sham) acupuncture (superficial needling of non-acupuncture points) over an 8 week period. Patients were asked at baseline whether they considered acupuncture to be an effective therapy in general and what they personally expected from the treatment. After three acupuncture sessions patients were asked how confident they were that they would benefit from the treatment strategy they were receiving. Patients were classified as responders if the respective main outcome measure improved by at least fifty percent. Both univariate and multivariate analyses adjusted for potential confounders (such as condition, intervention group, age, sex, duration of complaints, etc.) consistently showed a significant influence of attitudes and expectations on outcome. After completion of treatment, the odds ratio for response between patients considering acupuncture an effective or highly effective therapy and patients who were more sceptical was 1.67 (95% confidence interval 1.20-2.32). For personal expectations and confidence after the third session, odds ratios were 2.03 (1.26-3.26) and 2.35 (1.68-3.30), respectively. Results from the 6-month follow-up were similar. In conclusion, in our trials a significant association was shown between better improvement and higher outcome expectations.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Sci Rep
                Sci Rep
                Scientific Reports
                Nature Publishing Group
                2045-2322
                29 July 2016
                2016
                : 6
                : 30675
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Orthopaedics of the First Affiliated Hospital, Medical School, Xi’an Jiaotong University , Xi’an 710061, Shaanxi, China
                [2 ]Xi’an 521 Hospital , Xi’an 710065, Shaanxi, China
                [3 ]Department of Orthopaedics of the First Affiliated Hospital of Xi’an Medical College , Xi’an 710077, Shaanxi, China
                [4 ]Henan Province Hospital of TCM, Henan University of TCM , Zhengzhou 450008, Henan, China
                Author notes
                [*]

                These authors contributed equally to this work.

                Article
                srep30675
                10.1038/srep30675
                4965798
                27471137
                9389069f-43f8-4535-916a-9ea2cb5464df
                Copyright © 2016, The Author(s)

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History
                : 04 February 2016
                : 07 July 2016
                Categories
                Article

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article