File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Is acupuncture effective for the treatment of chronic pain? A systematic review

TitleIs acupuncture effective for the treatment of chronic pain? A systematic review
Authors
Issue Date2000
PublisherElsevier BV. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/pain
Citation
Pain, 2000, v. 86 n. 3, p. 217-225 How to Cite?
AbstractPain is the major complaint of the estimated one million U.S. consumers who use acupuncture each year. Although acupuncture is widely available in chronic pain clinics, the effectiveness of acupuncture for chronic pain remains in question. Our aim was to assess the effectiveness of acupuncture as a treatment for chronic pain within the context of the methodological quality of the studies. MEDLINE (1966-99), two complementary medicine databases, 69 conference proceedings, and the bibliographies of other articles and reviews were searched. Trials were included if they were randomized, had populations with pain longer than three months, used needles rather than surface electrodes, and were in English. Data were extracted by two independent reviewers using a validated instrument. Inter-rater disagreements were resolved by discussion. Fifty one studies met inclusion criteria. Clinical heterogeneity precluded statistical pooling. Results were positive in 21 studies, negative in 3 and neutral in 27. Three fourths of the studies received a low-quality score and low-quality trials were significantly associated with positive results (P = 0.05). High-quality studies clustered in designs using sham acupuncture as the control group, where the risk of false negative (type II) errors is high due to large sample size requirements. Six or more acupuncture treatments were significantly associated with positive outcomes (P = 0.03) even after adjusting for study quality. We conclude there is limited evidence that acupuncture is more effective than no treatment for chronic pain; and inconclusive evidence that acupuncture is more effective than placebo, sham acupuncture or standard care. However, we have found an important relationship between the methodology of the studies and their results that should guide future research. (C) 2000 International Association for the Study of Pain.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/188536
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 5.557
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 3.007
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorEzzo, Jen_US
dc.contributor.authorBerman, Ben_US
dc.contributor.authorHadhazy, VAen_US
dc.contributor.authorJadad, ARen_US
dc.contributor.authorLao, Len_US
dc.contributor.authorSingh, BBen_US
dc.date.accessioned2013-09-03T04:10:09Z-
dc.date.available2013-09-03T04:10:09Z-
dc.date.issued2000en_US
dc.identifier.citationPain, 2000, v. 86 n. 3, p. 217-225en_US
dc.identifier.issn0304-3959en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/188536-
dc.description.abstractPain is the major complaint of the estimated one million U.S. consumers who use acupuncture each year. Although acupuncture is widely available in chronic pain clinics, the effectiveness of acupuncture for chronic pain remains in question. Our aim was to assess the effectiveness of acupuncture as a treatment for chronic pain within the context of the methodological quality of the studies. MEDLINE (1966-99), two complementary medicine databases, 69 conference proceedings, and the bibliographies of other articles and reviews were searched. Trials were included if they were randomized, had populations with pain longer than three months, used needles rather than surface electrodes, and were in English. Data were extracted by two independent reviewers using a validated instrument. Inter-rater disagreements were resolved by discussion. Fifty one studies met inclusion criteria. Clinical heterogeneity precluded statistical pooling. Results were positive in 21 studies, negative in 3 and neutral in 27. Three fourths of the studies received a low-quality score and low-quality trials were significantly associated with positive results (P = 0.05). High-quality studies clustered in designs using sham acupuncture as the control group, where the risk of false negative (type II) errors is high due to large sample size requirements. Six or more acupuncture treatments were significantly associated with positive outcomes (P = 0.03) even after adjusting for study quality. We conclude there is limited evidence that acupuncture is more effective than no treatment for chronic pain; and inconclusive evidence that acupuncture is more effective than placebo, sham acupuncture or standard care. However, we have found an important relationship between the methodology of the studies and their results that should guide future research. (C) 2000 International Association for the Study of Pain.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherElsevier BV. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/painen_US
dc.relation.ispartofPainen_US
dc.subject.meshAcupuncture Therapyen_US
dc.subject.meshChronic Diseaseen_US
dc.subject.meshHumansen_US
dc.subject.meshPain Managementen_US
dc.subject.meshRandomized Controlled Trials As Topicen_US
dc.subject.meshSensitivity And Specificityen_US
dc.titleIs acupuncture effective for the treatment of chronic pain? A systematic reviewen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailLao, L: lxlao1@hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityLao, L=rp01784en_US
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltexten_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/S0304-3959(99)00304-8en_US
dc.identifier.pmid10812251-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-0034212202en_US
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-0034212202&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_US
dc.identifier.volume86en_US
dc.identifier.issue3en_US
dc.identifier.spage217en_US
dc.identifier.epage225en_US
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000087360900002-
dc.publisher.placeNetherlandsen_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridEzzo, J=6701568225en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridBerman, B=35458606800en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridHadhazy, VA=8728816500en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridJadad, AR=35430539800en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLao, L=7005681883en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridSingh, BB=7405639769en_US

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats