To evaluate the current evidence for effectiveness of acupuncture for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in the form of a systematic review, a systematic literature search was conducted in 23 electronic databases. Grey literature was also searched. The key search terms were “acupuncture” and “PTSD.” No language restrictions were imposed. We included all randomized or prospective clinical trials that evaluated acupuncture and its variants against a waitlist, sham acupuncture, conventional therapy control for PTSD, or without control. Four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 2 uncontrolled clinical trials (UCTs) out of 136 articles in total were systematically reviewed. One high-quality RCT reported that acupuncture was superior to waitlist control and therapeutic effects of acupuncture and cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) were similar based on the effect sizes. One RCT showed no statistical difference between acupuncture and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). One RCT reported a favorable effect of acupoint stimulation plus CBT against CBT alone. A meta-analysis of acupuncture plus moxibustion versus SSRI favored acupuncture plus moxibustion in three outcomes. This systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that the evidence of effectiveness of acupuncture for PTSD is encouraging but not cogent. Further qualified trials are needed to confirm whether acupuncture is effective for PTSD.

Objective To review the literature and systematically evaluate the effectiveness of Chuna (or Tuina) manual therapy (C[T]MT) on pain and function for musculoskeletal disorders. Methods We searched 15 English, Chinese, Japanese, and Korean databases using relevant keywords. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of C(T)MT for musculoskeletal disorders were considered, and we limited analyses to studies with a low-risk bias for randomization and/or allocation concealment. Results Sixty-six RCTs with 6,170 participants were included. One sham-controlled RCT showed that C(T)MT relieved pain more effectively than a sham control (SMD −3.09 [−3.59, −2.59]). For active-controlled RCTs, pooled meta-analysis showed that C(T)MT had statistically significant effects on pain reduction, especially compared to traction (P < 0.00001), drugs (P = 0.04), and physical therapies (P < 0.0001). For functional improvement, combined effects of C(T)MT with drugs (P = 0.04) and traction (P = 0.05) also showed similar positive effects. Conclusions This systematic review suggests that C(T)MT is safe and effective for pain reduction and functional improvement for musculoskeletal diseases; however, the evidence for functional improvement was not as strong as for pain reduction. For future studies, high-quality RCTs such as sham-controlled studies with standardized interventions are needed to provide sufficient evidence on the effects of C(T)MT for musculoskeletal diseases. Protocol registration number is CRD42016038307 04/07/2016.

No abstract

To evaluate the evidence supporting the effectiveness of acupuncture treatment for SCI and its complications, we conducted search across 19 electronic databases to find all of the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that used acupuncture as a treatment for SCI and its complications. The methodological quality of each RCT was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the PEDro scale. Sixteen RCTs, including 2 high-quality RCTs, met our inclusion criteria (8 for functional recovery from SCI, 6 for bladder dysfunction, and 2 for pain control). The meta-analysis showed positive results for the use of acupuncture combined with conventional treatments for the functional recovery in terms of motor ASIA scores and total FIM scores when compared to conventional treatments alone. Positive results were also obtained for the treatment of bladder dysfunction, in terms of the total efficacy rate, when comparing acupuncture to conventional treatments. However, 2 RCTs for pain control reported conflicting results. Our systematic review found encouraging albeit limited evidence for functional recovery, bladder dysfunction, and pain in SCI. However, to obtain stronger evidence without the drawbacks of trial design and the quality of studies, we recommend sham-controlled RCTs or comparative effectiveness research for each condition to test the effectiveness of acupuncture.

IntroductionRecurrent or persistent low back pain is common after back surgery but is typically not well controlled. Previous randomised controlled trials on non-acute pain after back surgery were flawed. In this article, the design and protocol of a randomised controlled trial to treat pain and improve function after back surgery are described.Methods and analysisThis study is a pilot randomised, active-controlled, assessor-blinded trial. Patients with recurring or persistent low back pain after back surgery, defined as a visual analogue scale value of ≥50 mm, with or without leg pain, will be randomly assigned to an electroacupuncture-plus-usual-care group or to a usual-care-only group. Patients assigned to both groups will have usual care management, including physical therapy and patient education, twice a week during a 4-week treatment period that would begin at randomisation. Patients assigned to the electroacupuncture-plus-usual-care group will also have electroacupuncture twice a week during the 4-week treatment period. The primary outcome will be measured with the 100 mm pain visual analogue scale of low back pain by a blinded evaluator. Secondary outcomes will be measured with the EuroQol 5-Dimension and the Oswestry Disability Index. The primary and secondary outcomes will be measured at 4 and 8 weeks after treatment.Ethics and disseminationWritten informed consent will be obtained from all participants. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of Pusan National University Korean Hospital in September 2013 (IRB approval number 2013012). The study findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and international conferences.Trial registration numberThis trial was registered with the US National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials Registry: NCT01966250.

No abstract

Objectives The purpose of this study is to understand current status of Korean Medicine treatment practice patterns for traffic injuries by web-based survey. Methods The structured questionnaire was distributed by a web based survey to 1,630 potential respondents by email from December 19th in 2016 to February 13th in 2017. All data were statistically analysed. Results The response rate was 79.4%. According to the analysis of the outcome of the survey, 88.0% of the participants felt necessity of the development of Korean medicine clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for traffic injuries. Survey results showed cognitive degree about Korean Medicine CPGs' necessity, individual Korean medicine treatments and requirement for extending insurance coverage for patients with traffic injuries. Conclusions This survey study helps to determine current clinical practice patterns of Korea medicine treatments for traffic injuries. These results further anticipate to provide basic data for CPGs for traffic injuries.

ObjectivesThe aim of this pilot study was to estimate the sample size for a large pragmatic study of the comparative effectiveness of electroacupuncture (EA) for low back pain (LBP) after back surgery.DesignA randomised, active-controlled, assessor-blinded trial.ParticipantsPatients with recurrent or persistent LBP, defined as a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score of ≥50 mm, with or without leg pain after back surgery.InterventionsPatients were randomised to an EA plus usual care (UC) group or to a UC alone group at a 1:1 ratio. Patients assigned to each group received UC, including drug therapy, physical therapy and back pain education, twice a week for 4 weeks; those assigned to the EA plus UC group additionally received EA.Outcome measuresThe primary outcome was severity of LBP as measured by VAS. Secondary outcomes included back pain-related disability, assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and quality of life, assessed using the EuroQol Five Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire. Statistical analysis was performed using paired and independent t-tests. A p value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant.ResultsThirty-nine patients were allocated to receive EA plus UC (n=18) or UC alone (n=21). There was no statistically significant difference in VAS or EQ-5D scores between the two groups, but there was a significant decrease in ODI scores (p=0.0081). Using G*Power, it was calculated that 40 participants per group would be needed for a future trial according to VAS scores. Considering for a 25% dropout rate, 108 participants (54 per group) would be needed.ConclusionsA future trial addressing the risk of bias and including the estimated sample size would allow for better clinical assessment of the benefits of EA plus UC in treatment of patients with non-acute pain after back surgery.Trial registration numberNCT01966250.