Background:The effectiveness of acupuncture for managing carpal tunnel syndrome is uncertain, particularly in patients already receiving conventional treatments (e.g., splinting). We aimed to assess the effects of electroacupuncture combined with splinting. Methods:We conducted a randomized parallel-group assessor-blinded 2-arm trial on patients with clinically diagnosed primary carpal tunnel syndrome. The treatment group was offered 13 sessions of electroacupuncture over 17 weeks. The treatment and control groups both received continuous nocturnal wrist splinting. Results:Of 181 participants randomly assigned to electroacupuncture combined with splinting (n = 90) or splinting alone (n = 91), 174 (96.1%) completed all follow-up. The electroacupuncture group showed greater improvements at 17 weeks in symptoms (primary outcome of Symptom Severity Scale score mean difference [MD] -0.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.36 to -0.03), disability (Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire score MD -6.72, 95% CI -10.9 to -2.57), function (Functional Status Scale score MD -0.22, 95% CI -0.38 to -0.05), dexterity (time to complete blinded pick-up test MD -6.13 seconds, 95% CI -10.6 to -1.63) and maximal tip pinch strength (MD 1.17 lb, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.86). Differences between groups were small and clinically unimportant for reduction in pain (numerical rating scale -0.70, 95% CI -1.34 to -0.06), and not significant for sensation (first finger monofilament test -0.08 mm, 95% CI -0.22 to 0.06).Interpretation: For patients with primary carpal tunnel syndrome, chronic mild to moderate symptoms and no indication for surgery, electroacupuncture produces small changes in symptoms, disability, function, dexterity and pinch strength when added to nocturnal splinting.
Background:Meta-analysis (MA) of randomised trials is considered to be one of the best approaches for summarising high-quality evidence on the efficacy and safety of treatments. However, methodological flaws in MAs can reduce the validity of conclusions, subsequently impairing the quality of decision making.Aims:To assess the methodological quality of MAs on COPD treatments.Methods:A cross-sectional study on MAs of COPD trials. MAs published during 2000–2013 were sampled from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effect. Methodological quality was assessed using the validated AMSTAR (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews) tool.Results:Seventy-nine MAs were sampled. Only 18% considered the scientific quality of primary studies when formulating conclusions and 49% used appropriate meta-analytic methods to combine findings. The problems were particularly acute among MAs on pharmacological treatments. In 48% of MAs the authors did not report conflict of interest. Fifty-eight percent reported harmful effects of treatment. Publication bias was not assessed in 65% of MAs, and only 10% had searched non-English databases.Conclusions:The methodological quality of the included MAs was disappointing. Consideration of scientific quality when formulating conclusions should be made explicit. Future MAs should improve on reporting conflict of interest and harm, assessment of publication bias, prevention of language bias and use of appropriate meta-analytic methods.
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.