IMPORTANCE Research into acupuncture and acupressure and their application for cancer pain has been growing, but the findings have been inconsistent. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the existing randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for evidence of the association of acupuncture and acupressure with reduction in cancer pain.DATA SOURCES Three English-language databases (PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL) and 4 Chinese-language biomedical databases (Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, VIP Database for Chinese Technical Periodicals, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang) were searched for RCTs published from database inception through March 31, 2019.STUDY SELECTION Randomized clinical trials that compared acupuncture and acupressure with a sham control, analgesic therapy, or usual care for managing cancer pain were included.DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Data were screened and extracted independently using predesigned forms. The quality of RCTs was appraised with the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool. Random-effects modeling was used to calculate the effect sizes of included RCTs. The quality of evidence was evaluated with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was pain intensity measured by the Brief Pain Inventory, Numerical Rating Scale, Visual Analog Scale, or Verbal Rating Scale. RESULTS A total of 17 RCTs (with 1111 patients) were included in the systematic review, and data from 14 RCTs (with 920 patients) were used in the meta-analysis. Seven sham-controlled RCTs (35%) were notable for their high quality, being judged to have a low risk of bias for all of their domains, and showed that real (compared with sham) acupuncture was associated with reduced pain intensity (mean difference [MD], −1.38 points; 95% CI, −2.13 to −0.64 points; I 2 = 81%). A favorable association was also seen when acupuncture and acupressure were combined with analgesic therapy in 6 RCTs for reducing pain intensity (MD, −1.44 points; 95% CI, −1.98 to −0.89; I 2 = 92%) and in 2 RCTs for reducing opioid dose (MD, −30.00 mg morphine equivalent daily dose; 95% CI, −37.5 mg to −22.5 mg). The evidence grade was moderate because of the substantial heterogeneity among studies. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEThis systematic review and meta-analysis found that acupuncture and/or acupressure was significantly associated with reduced cancer pain and decreased use of analgesics, although the evidence level was moderate. This finding suggests that more rigorous trials are needed to identify the association of acupuncture and acupressure with specific types of cancer pain and to integrate such evidence into clinical care to reduce opioid use. Research Original InvestigationAssociation of Acupuncture and Acupressure With Improved Cancer Pain 37. Tao WW, Jiang H, Tao XM, Jiang P, Sha LY, Sun XC. Effects of acupuncture, tuina, tai chi, qigong, and traditional Chinese medicine five-element music therapy on symptom management and quality of life for cancer patients: a meta...
Gegen (Radix Puerariae Lobatae), the root of Pueraria lobata, is an edible and medicinal herb which has been used in treating diabetic symptoms in the orient for thousands of years. We present an evidence map of the efficacy and safety of Gegen and Gegen formulas (GGFs) that use Gegen as an essential herb for diabetes, and also its mechanism of actions. We comprehensively searched the ancient medical records to identify empirical evidence; conducted a systematic review (SR) based on moderate- to high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to synthesize the clinical evidence; and reviewed the possible mechanisms of its antidiabetic effects. Empirical application of Gegen in treating diabetic symptoms dated back to more than 2000 years ago. Common herbs used in RCTs that accompany with Gegen included Radix et Rhizoma Glycyrrhizae, Radix et Rhizoma Ginseng, Rhizoma Dioscoreae, Poria, and Radix Ophiopogonis. The combinations used today are consistent with their usage in ancient times. Results of the SR showed that GGFs could benefit patients with type 2 diabetes for blood glucose control. When in combination with hypoglycemic agents or insulin, GGFs enhanced the glucose-lowering effect as well as the lipid-lowering effects. Also, the incidence and the risk of adverse events (AE), especially the hypoglycemic episodes, were lower in the combination group. No serious or life-threatening AE was reported. The experimental evidence presented that Gegen and GGFs might exert and enhance the anti-diabetic effects through activation of multiple mechanisms, such as reducing insulin resistance, increasing insulin release, inhibiting glucose absorption and reabsorption, and improving insulin sensitivity, glucose uptake, and metabolism.
Background This study aims to develop an evidence-based clinical practice guideline of acupuncture in the treatment of patients with moderate and severe cancer pain. Methods The development of this guideline was triggered by a systematic review published in JAMA Oncology in 2020. We searched databases and websites for evidence on patient preferences and values, and other resources of using acupuncture for treatment of cancer pain. Recommendations were developed through a Delphi consensus of an international multidisciplinary panel including 13 western medicine oncologists, Chinese medicine/acupuncture clinical practitioners, and two patient representatives. The certainty of evidence, patient preferences and values, resources, and other factors were fully considered in formulating the recommendations. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was employed to rate the certainty of evidence and the strength of recommendations. Results The guideline proposed three recommendations: (1) a strong recommendation for the treatment of acupuncture rather than no treatment to relieve pain in patients with moderate to severe cancer pain; (2) a weak recommendation for the combination treatments with acupuncture/acupressure to reduce pain intensity, decrease the opioid dose, and alleviate opioid-related side effects in moderate to severe cancer pain patients who are using analgesics; and (3) a strong recommendation for acupuncture in breast cancer patients to relieve their aromatase inhibitor-induced arthralgia. Conclusion This proposed guideline provides recommendations for the management of patients with cancer pain. The small sample sizes of evidence limit the strength of the recommendations and highlights the need for additional research.
Introduction The National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for adult cancer pain indicate that acupuncture and related therapies may be valuable additions to pharmacological interventions for pain management. Of the systematic reviews related to this topic, some concluded that acupuncture was promising for alleviating cancer pain, while others argued that the evidence was insufficient to support its effectiveness.Methods and analysisThis review will consist of three components: (1) synthesis of findings from existing systematic reviews; (2) updated meta-analyses of randomised clinical trials and (3) analyses of results of other types of clinical studies. We will search six English and four Chinese biomedical databases, dissertations and grey literature to identify systematic reviews and primary clinical studies. Two reviewers will screen results of the literature searches independently to identify included reviews and studies. Data from included articles will be abstracted for assessment, analysis and summary. Two assessors will appraise the quality of systematic reviews using Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews; assess the randomised controlled trials using the Cochrane Collaboration’s risk of bias tool and other types of studies according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. We will use ‘summary of evidence’ tables to present evidence from existing systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Using the primary clinical studies, we will conduct meta-analysis for each outcome, by grouping studies based on the type of acupuncture, the comparator and the specific type of pain. Sensitivity analyses are planned according to clinical factors, acupuncture method, methodological characteristics and presence of statistical heterogeneity as applicable. For the non-randomised studies, we will tabulate the characteristics, outcome measures and the reported results of each study. Consistencies and inconsistencies in evidence will be investigated and discussed. Finally, we will use the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach to evaluate the quality of the overall evidence.Ethics and disseminationThere are no ethical considerations associated with this review. The findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals or conference presentations.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017064113.
IntroductionChinese medicine is commonly used to combine with pharmacotherapy for the treatment of acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD). Six Chinese herb formulas involving Weijing decoction, Maxingshigan decoction, Yuebijiabanxia decoction, Qingqihuatan decoction, Dingchuan decoction and Sangbaipi decoction are recommended in Chinese medicine clinical guideline or textbook, to relieve patients with phlegm-heat according to Chinese syndrome differentiation. However, the comparative effectiveness among these six formulas has not been investigated in published randomised controlled trials. We plan to summarise the direct and indirect evidence for these six formulas combined with pharmacotherapy to determine the relative merits options for the management of AECOPD.Methods and analysisWe will perform the comprehensive search for the randomised controlled trials to evaluate the effectiveness of six Chinese herb formulas recommended in Chinese medicine clinical guideline or textbook. The combination of pharmacotherapy includes bronchodilators, antibiotics and corticosteroids that are routinely prescribed for AECOPD. The primary outcome will be lung function, arterial blood gases and length of hospital stay. The data screening and extraction will be conducted by two different reviewers. The quality of RCT will be assessed according to the Cochrane handbook risk of bias tool. The Bayes of network meta-analysis (NMA) will be conducted with WinBUGS to compare the effectiveness of six formulas. We will also use the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to obtain the comprehensive rank for these treatments.Ethics and disseminationThis review does not require ethics approval and the results of NMA will be submitted to a peer-review journal.Trial registration numberPROSPERO (CRD42016052699).
IntroductionAlthough acupuncture has been recommended for alleviating cancer pain by clinical guidelines, the level of the supporting evidence needs to be improved. A pragmatic randomised controlled trial (pRCT) in a hospital setting would provide real-world assessments of the overall clinical effects of acupuncture. This pilot trial aims to explore the feasibility and provide data for sample size calculations for a pRCT evaluating the effectiveness of acupuncture as an adjunctive therapy to routine medical care for cancer pain.Methods and analysisThirty patients with cancer admitted to the oncology department with moderate or severe pain will be recruited. Participants will be randomised at a ratio of 1:1 to the adjunctive acupuncture group or a control group which receives routine pain management without acupuncture. The standardised section of the acupuncture protocol will be developed based on the results of reviews of the literature, recommendations in clinical guidelines and interviews with clinical experts. The acupuncturist will be allowed to tailor the protocol according to the individual situation of each participant. Primary outcomes relevant to the feasibility of conducting a fully powered trial include: numbers and proportions of participants recruited, screened, consented and randomised; numbers and reasons for withdrawals and dropouts; numbers and types of adverse events; feasibility of implementing the trial procedures; evaluation of the comprehensiveness and ease-of-use of the case report form. Secondary outcomes are clinical measurements of the effectiveness of the treatment that are intended for use in the full-scale trial. Analysis of feasibility will be descriptive and pain intensity measures will be analysed using mixed-effects regression.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval was obtained from the Institutional Ethics Committee of Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine (approval no: Z2017-184-01) and RMIT University Human Research Ethics Committee (reference no: 21361). Results will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal, and trial participants will be informed via email and/or phone calls.Trial registration numberChiCTR1800017023
Objective: Given the existing evidence for the analgesic effect of acupuncture, the current study aimed to assess whether acupuncture could be feasible and manageable as an adjunctive therapy for cancer pain in a real-world hospital setting. Methods: Thirty patients in an Oncology department with moderate or severe pain were recruited and randomized to an adjunctive acupuncture group or control group, who received pharmacotherapy for pain management without acupuncture. The duration of the treatment course was 1 week with a 2-week follow-up. In total, four acupuncture sessions were administered, on days 1/2/4/6 of the trial. Pain intensity was measured using a numerical rating scale (NRS) and the daily opioid dose was recorded. Results: The overall trends favored acupuncture for both pain intensity and daily opioid consumption. The proportion of participants experiencing at least a 2-point reduction in the NRS at the end of the treatment was 93% (n = 14/15) for the acupuncture group and 57% (n = 8/14) for the control group (risk difference (RD) 36.1%, 95% confidence interval (CI) [7.4%–65.0%]; relative risk (RR) 1.63, 95% CI [1.02–2.62]; p = 0.04). There were no serious adverse events and no dropouts during the treatment. Conclusion: This pilot study showed that adding acupuncture to routine analgesia for patients with cancer pain was feasible and acceptable to patients. The clinical effects of adding acupuncture as an adjunctive therapy need to be further evaluated. Clinical trial registration number: ChiCTR1800017023 (Chinese Clinical Trial Registry)
Background. Ischemic stroke (IS) seriously impacts the quality of life of survivors. Chinese medicine (CM) has been developed for more than 2000 years and plays a key role in the treatment of ischemic stroke. Many Chinese medicine clinical trials have been conducted; however, the heterogeneity of outcome measurements and reporting limits implications of the findings in clinical practice and health policy development. Therefore, it is important to develop a core outcome set (COS) that should be used and reported in trials for ischemic stroke treated by Chinese medicine. This protocol describes the process of developing the IS-CM-COS. Methods and Analysis. The development of the COS will involve the following four steps: (1) A list of outcomes reported in the registered and published Chinese medicine trials of ischemic stroke will be extracted by conducting a systematic literature review. (2) An additional outcome list will be collected by semistructured interview to patients with ischemic stroke. (3) A two-round Delphi survey will be performed to prioritize and condense the outcomes. (4) In the consensus meeting, a final recommended COS will be developed. Discussion. The COS could improve the reliability and consistency of outcome reporting. We hope that this IS-CM-COS will be used in the future Chinese medicine trials for the treatment of ischemic stroke and improve research quality. Trial Registration. This study was registered with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Initiative (http://www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/1282).
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.