Background: This two-arm, parallel, pragmatic, multicenter, clinical randomized, controlled trial with a 12-week follow-up period aimed to compare the effectiveness of pharmacopuncture therapy and physical therapy strategies for chronic neck pain. Methods: Eight sessions of pharmacopuncture therapy or physical therapy were administered within 2 weeks. The primary outcome was the visual analogue scale (VAS) score for neck pain. The secondary outcomes were the scores of the Northwick Park questionnaire (NPQ), VAS score for radiating arm pain, numeric rating scale (NRS) for neck and arm bothersomeness, neck disability index (NDI), patient global impression of change (PGIC), 12-item short form health survey (SF-12), and EuroQoL 5-dimension 5-level (EQ-5D-5L) instrument. The protocol was registered with Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04035018) and CRIS (KCT0004243). Results: We randomly allocated 101 participants with chronic neck pain to the pharmacopuncture therapy (n = 50) or physical therapy group (n = 51). At the primary endpoint (week 5) the pharmacopuncture therapy group showed significantly superior effects regarding VAS score for neck pain and arm bothersomeness, NRS for neck pain, NDI, NPQ, and PGIC compared with the physical therapy group. These effects were sustained up to 12 weeks after follow-up. Conclusion: Compared with physical therapy, pharmacopuncture therapy had superior effects on the pain and functional recovery of patients with chronic neck pain.

Purpose Chronic lower back pain (LBP) is a major global health concern. Pharmacopuncture has been widely used to treat LBP in Korea; however, randomized clinical trials (RCT) or active control have not been conducted to evaluate its effectiveness. Therefore, this RCT aimed to compare the effectiveness of pharmacopuncture and physical therapy (PT) for the treatment of chronic LBP. Patients and Methods A two-arm, parallel, and multicenter RCT was conducted at four hospitals of Korean medicine. Participants with chronic LBP were randomly assigned at a 1:1 ratio using block randomization to undergo 10 sessions of pharmacopuncture or PT over 5 weeks and followed up for 25 weeks. The numerical rating scale (NRS) and visual analog scale scores of LBP and radiating leg pain and the Oswestry disability index (ODI), 5-level EuroQol-5 dimension (EQ-5D-5L), and the patient global impression of change were recorded at baseline and at 6, 13, and 25 weeks. An intention-to-treat analysis was conducted as the primary analysis using a linear mixed model. Results One-hundred patients (mean age, 49.27 years; 58 women) were recruited. At 6 weeks after randomization, pharmacopuncture showed statistically superior results compared with PT in LBP (difference in NRS, 1.54; 95% CI, 0.94–2.13), function (difference in ODI, 4.52%; 95% CI, 0.93–8.11%), and quality of life (difference in EQ-5D-5L) scores (−0.05; 95% CI, −0.08 to −0.01). This effect persisted for 25 weeks. In the survival analysis for participants with at least a 50% reduction in the NRS scores of LBP during the 182-day follow-up, the pharmacopuncture group showed significantly faster recovery than the PT group (P<0.001, Log rank test). Conclusion Pharmacopuncture significantly reduced pain and improved functional outcomes and quality of life in patients with low back pain compared with physical therapy. Based on the findings of this study, pharmacopuncture could be recommended as a treatment for patients with chronic low back pain.