Efficacy and safety of acupuncture for pain relief: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Supportive Care in Cancer Pub Date : 2024-11-09 DOI:10.1007/s00520-024-08971-9
Chu Qin, Huan Ma, Haojie Ni, Minyan Wang, Yun Shi, Oscar Onayi Mandizadza, Lihong Li, Conghua Ji
{"title":"Efficacy and safety of acupuncture for pain relief: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Chu Qin, Huan Ma, Haojie Ni, Minyan Wang, Yun Shi, Oscar Onayi Mandizadza, Lihong Li, Conghua Ji","doi":"10.1007/s00520-024-08971-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of traditional acupuncture for pain relief based on rigorously designed RCTs with double-blind. The findings seek to provide valuable insights for clinical practice and inform future research.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases for randomized controlled trials on traditional acupuncture for pain management using a double-blind design, published from database inception to November 22, 2023. The Risk of Bias 2 (RoB2) tool was used to assess potential biases in the included studies, followed by a comprehensive analysis to evaluate efficacy and safety.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The findings show a significant positive effect on pain improvement, evidenced by changes in visual analog scale scores (mean difference 0.97 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66-1.27]). Safety analysis showed no significant differences in adverse reactions between the acupuncture and control groups (relative risk 1.40 [95% CI 0.52-3.74]), with no serious adverse effects reported.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Traditional acupuncture is effective and safe in pain management. This suggests that acupuncture can be a valuable approach in clinical practice. Future studies should explore optimal treatment durations and frequency, using larger sample sizes for more comprehensive insights.</p>","PeriodicalId":22046,"journal":{"name":"Supportive Care in Cancer","volume":"32 12","pages":"780"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Supportive Care in Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-024-08971-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of traditional acupuncture for pain relief based on rigorously designed RCTs with double-blind. The findings seek to provide valuable insights for clinical practice and inform future research.

Methods: A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases for randomized controlled trials on traditional acupuncture for pain management using a double-blind design, published from database inception to November 22, 2023. The Risk of Bias 2 (RoB2) tool was used to assess potential biases in the included studies, followed by a comprehensive analysis to evaluate efficacy and safety.

Results: The findings show a significant positive effect on pain improvement, evidenced by changes in visual analog scale scores (mean difference 0.97 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66-1.27]). Safety analysis showed no significant differences in adverse reactions between the acupuncture and control groups (relative risk 1.40 [95% CI 0.52-3.74]), with no serious adverse effects reported.

Conclusion: Traditional acupuncture is effective and safe in pain management. This suggests that acupuncture can be a valuable approach in clinical practice. Future studies should explore optimal treatment durations and frequency, using larger sample sizes for more comprehensive insights.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
针灸镇痛的有效性和安全性:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
研究目的本研究旨在通过严格设计的双盲 RCT 评估传统针灸镇痛的疗效和安全性。研究结果旨在为临床实践提供有价值的见解,并为未来研究提供参考:在 PubMed、Web of Science、Cochrane Library 和 Embase 数据库中进行文献检索,检索自数据库建立至 2023 年 11 月 22 日期间发表的采用双盲设计的传统针灸止痛随机对照试验。使用偏倚风险2(RoB2)工具评估纳入研究中的潜在偏倚,然后进行综合分析以评估疗效和安全性:结果:研究结果表明,视觉模拟量表评分的变化(平均差异为 0.97 [95%置信区间(CI)为 0.66-1.27])对疼痛的改善有明显的积极作用。安全性分析表明,针灸组和对照组的不良反应无明显差异(相对风险 1.40 [95% CI 0.52-3.74]),无严重不良反应报告:结论:传统针灸治疗疼痛有效且安全。结论:传统针灸对疼痛治疗有效且安全,这表明针灸在临床实践中是一种有价值的方法。今后的研究应采用更大的样本量,探索最佳治疗时间和频率,以获得更全面的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Supportive Care in Cancer
Supportive Care in Cancer 医学-康复医学
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
9.70%
发文量
751
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Supportive Care in Cancer provides members of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) and all other interested individuals, groups and institutions with the most recent scientific and social information on all aspects of supportive care in cancer patients. It covers primarily medical, technical and surgical topics concerning supportive therapy and care which may supplement or substitute basic cancer treatment at all stages of the disease. Nursing, rehabilitative, psychosocial and spiritual issues of support are also included.
期刊最新文献
Changes in perceived distress among patients receiving inpatient palliative care. Oral foci of infection and their relationship with hospital stay after haematopoietic cell transplantation. COVID-19 testing and financial toxicity in cancer survivors. Letter to the editor to "Outcomes of parenteral nutrition in patients with advanced cancer and malignant bowel obstruction". Skeletal muscle mass, strength, and physical performance gains are similar between healthy postmenopausal women and postmenopausal breast cancer survivors after 12 weeks of resistance exercise training.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1