Background Acupuncture is a popular complementary and alternative treatment for chronic back pain. Recent European trials suggest similar short-term benefits from real and sham acupuncture needling. This trial addresses the importance of needle placement and skin penetration in eliciting acupuncture effects for patients with chronic low back pain. Methods 638 adults with chronic mechanical low back pain were randomized to: individualized acupuncture, standardized acupuncture, simulated acupuncture, or usual care. Ten treatments were provided over 7 weeks by experienced acupuncturists. The primary outcomes were back-related dysfunction (Roland Disability score, range: 0 to 23) and symptom bothersomeness (0 to 10 scale). Outcomes were assessed at baseline and after 8, 26 and 52 weeks. Results At 8 weeks, mean dysfunction scores for the individualized, standardized, and simulated acupuncture groups improved by 4.4, 4.5, and 4.4 points, respectively, compared with 2.1 points for those receiving usual care (P<0.001). Participants receiving real or simulated acupuncture were more likely than those receiving usual care to experience clinically meaningful improvements on the dysfunction scale (60% vs. 39%, P<0.0001). Symptoms improved by 1.6 to 1.9 points in the treatment groups compared with 0.7 points in the usual care group (P<0.0001). After one year, participants in the treatment groups were more likely than those receiving usual care group to experience clinically meaningful improvements in dysfunction (59% to 65% versus 50%, respectively, P=0.02) but not in symptoms (P>0.05). Conclusions Although acupuncture was found effective for chronic low back pain, tailoring needling sites to each patient and penetration of the skin appear to be unimportant in eliciting therapeutic benefits. These findings raise questions about acupuncture’s purported mechanisms of action. It remains unclear whether acupuncture, or our simulated method of acupuncture, provide physiologically important stimulation or represent placebo or non-specific effects.
Background Chronic low back pain is a common problem lacking highly effective treatment options. Small trials suggest that yoga may have benefits for this condition. This trial was designed to determine whether yoga is more effective than conventional stretching exercises or a self-care book for primary care patients with chronic low back pain. Methods 228 adults with chronic low back pain were randomized to 12 weekly classes of yoga (n=92) or conventional stretching exercises (n=91) or a self-care book (n=45). Back-related functional status (modified Roland Disability Questionnaire, 23-point scale) and bothersomeness of pain (11-point numerical scale) at 12 weeks were the primary outcomes. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, 6, 12 and 26 weeks by interviewers unaware of treatment group. Results After adjustment for baseline values, 12-week outcomes for the yoga group were superior to those for the self-care group (mean difference for function = −2.5 [95% CI= −3.7 to −1.3; P<0.001]; mean difference for symptoms = −1.1 [95% CI= −1.7 to −0.4; P<0.001]). At 26 weeks, function for the yoga group remained superior (mean difference = −1.8 [95% CI= − 3.1 to −0.5; P<0.0001]). Yoga was not superior to conventional stretching exercises at any time point. Conclusions Yoga classes were more effective than a self-care book, but not stretching classes, in improving function and reducing symptoms due to chronic low back pain, with benefits lasting at least several months.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations –citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.