Effectiveness of Acupuncture and Electroacupuncture for Chronic Neck Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Saved in:
| Title: | Effectiveness of Acupuncture and Electroacupuncture for Chronic Neck Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Seo, See Yoon, Lee, Ki-Beom, Shin, Joon-Shik, Lee, Jinho, Kim, Me-Riong, Ha, In-Hyuk, Ko, Youme, Lee, Yoon Jae |
| Source: | American Journal of Chinese Medicine. 2017, Vol. 45 Issue 8, p1573-1595. 23p. 4 Diagrams, 2 Charts. |
| Subjects: | Chronic pain treatment, Evaluation of medical care, Neck pain treatment, Acupuncture, Chinese people, Clinical medicine, Databases, Electroacupuncture, Japanese people, Meta-analysis, Patient safety, Research funding, Systematic reviews |
| Geographic Terms: | Korea |
| Abstract: | The aim of this systematic review was to assess evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture and electroacupuncture in patients with chronic neck pain. We searched nine databases including Chinese, Japanese and Korean databases through 30 July 2016. The participants were adults with chronic neck pain and were treated with acupuncture or electroacupuncture. Eligible trials were those with intervention groups receiving acupuncture and electroacupuncture with or without active control, and control groups receiving other conventional treatments such as physical therapy or medication. Outcomes included pain intensity, disability, quality of life (QoL) and adverse effects. For statistical pooling, the standardized mean difference (SMD) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a fixed-effects model. Sixteen RCTs were selected. The comparison of the sole acupuncture group and the active control group did not come out with a significant difference in pain (SMD 0.24, 95% CI 0.27-0.75), disability (SMD 0.51, 95% CI 0.01-1.02), or QoL (SMD 0.37, 95% CI 1.09-0.35), showing a similar effectiveness of acupuncture with active control. When acupuncture was added into the control group, the acupuncture add-on group showed significantly higher relief of pain in studies with unclear allocation concealment (SMD 1.78, 95% CI 2.08-1.48), but did not show significant relief of pain in studies with good allocation concealment (SMD 0.07, 95% CI 0.26-0.12). Significant relief of pain was observed when the sole electroacupuncture group was compared to the control group or electroacupuncture was added onto the active control group, but a lot of the results were evaluated to have low level of evidence, making it difficult to draw clear conclusions. In the result reporting adverse effects, no serious outcome of adverse event was confirmed. Acupuncture and conventional medicine for chronic neck pain have similar effectiveness on pain and disability when compared solely between the two of them. When acupuncture was added onto conventional treatment it relieved pain better, and electroacupuncture relieved pain even more. It is difficult to draw conclusion because the included studies have a high risk of bias and imprecision. Therefore better designed large-scale studies are needed in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of American Journal of Chinese Medicine is the property of World Scientific Publishing Company and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
Be the first to leave a comment!
