Prior acupuncture experience among elderly participants enrolled in a clinical trial of acupuncture for chronic low back pain: Implications for future trials

IF 2.8 4区 医学 Q2 INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE
Prince Ziyi Wang , Alice Pressman , Gabriela Sanchez , Crystal Aparicio , Arya Nielsen , Andrew Avins
{"title":"Prior acupuncture experience among elderly participants enrolled in a clinical trial of acupuncture for chronic low back pain: Implications for future trials","authors":"Prince Ziyi Wang ,&nbsp;Alice Pressman ,&nbsp;Gabriela Sanchez ,&nbsp;Crystal Aparicio ,&nbsp;Arya Nielsen ,&nbsp;Andrew Avins","doi":"10.1016/j.imr.2024.101042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The effectiveness of acupuncture for chronic low back pain (cLBP) has not been studied specifically in the 65-and-older population. To inform the validity and generalizability of future acupuncture studies among older adults, we characterized elderly participants’ prior experience with and views toward acupuncture and tested for clinical and sociodemographic differences between acupuncture-naïve and non-naïve participants.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Data for this study were collected during the baseline telephone interview from the participants enrolled in the Kaiser Permanente Northern California site of an NIH-funded, multicenter clinical trial of acupuncture for cLBP in older adults.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Nearly two-thirds (65.6 %) of participants surveyed reported they had previously received acupuncture treatment with the vast majority seeking acupuncture treatment for pain-related issues (84.8 %). The majority of these participants reported relatively modest levels of exposure to acupuncture with most participants (63.1 %) reporting fewer than 10 treatment sessions over their lifetimes. There were no significant differences in age, sex, race, ethnicity, disability scores, income levels, or pain levels between the acupuncture-naïve and non-naïve groups.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Contextual consideration for prior acupuncture utilization rates is warranted and may be higher than expected or previously reported. We found few differences in baseline characteristics between participants who were acupuncture-naïve and those with prior acupuncture experience; thus, future pragmatic clinical trials might relax previous acupuncture-use considerations in their recruitment criteria. For trials focused on acupuncture-naive patients, it may be more feasible to expand the definition of \"acupuncture-naive\" based on lifetime acupuncture visits or time since last treatment.</p></div><div><h3>Trial registration</h3><p>The protocol was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (#NCT04982315).</p></div>","PeriodicalId":13644,"journal":{"name":"Integrative Medicine Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213422024000222/pdfft?md5=88c37a653e135dd35b3ba05f54c7c1a8&pid=1-s2.0-S2213422024000222-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Integrative Medicine Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213422024000222","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The effectiveness of acupuncture for chronic low back pain (cLBP) has not been studied specifically in the 65-and-older population. To inform the validity and generalizability of future acupuncture studies among older adults, we characterized elderly participants’ prior experience with and views toward acupuncture and tested for clinical and sociodemographic differences between acupuncture-naïve and non-naïve participants.

Methods

Data for this study were collected during the baseline telephone interview from the participants enrolled in the Kaiser Permanente Northern California site of an NIH-funded, multicenter clinical trial of acupuncture for cLBP in older adults.

Results

Nearly two-thirds (65.6 %) of participants surveyed reported they had previously received acupuncture treatment with the vast majority seeking acupuncture treatment for pain-related issues (84.8 %). The majority of these participants reported relatively modest levels of exposure to acupuncture with most participants (63.1 %) reporting fewer than 10 treatment sessions over their lifetimes. There were no significant differences in age, sex, race, ethnicity, disability scores, income levels, or pain levels between the acupuncture-naïve and non-naïve groups.

Conclusion

Contextual consideration for prior acupuncture utilization rates is warranted and may be higher than expected or previously reported. We found few differences in baseline characteristics between participants who were acupuncture-naïve and those with prior acupuncture experience; thus, future pragmatic clinical trials might relax previous acupuncture-use considerations in their recruitment criteria. For trials focused on acupuncture-naive patients, it may be more feasible to expand the definition of "acupuncture-naive" based on lifetime acupuncture visits or time since last treatment.

Trial registration

The protocol was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (#NCT04982315).

参加针灸治疗慢性腰背痛临床试验的老年参与者的针灸经验:对未来试验的启示
背景针灸治疗慢性腰背痛(cLBP)的有效性尚未在 65 岁及以上人群中进行专门研究。为了为今后在老年人中开展的针灸研究提供有效性和可推广性方面的信息,我们对老年参与者以前的针灸经验和对针灸的看法进行了描述,并测试了未针灸和未针灸参与者在临床和社会人口学方面的差异。结果近三分之二(65.6%)的受访者称他们以前接受过针灸治疗,其中绝大多数人(84.8%)寻求针灸治疗与疼痛相关的问题。大多数受访者(63.1%)表示,他们一生中接受过的针灸治疗次数少于 10 次。针灸无效组和非针灸无效组在年龄、性别、种族、民族、残疾评分、收入水平或疼痛程度方面没有明显差异。我们发现,针灸新手和有过针灸经验的参与者之间的基线特征几乎没有差异;因此,未来的实用临床试验在招募标准中可能会放宽对先前针灸使用情况的考虑。对于针对针灸无效患者的试验,根据终生针灸次数或最后一次治疗后的时间来扩大 "针灸无效 "的定义可能更为可行。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Integrative Medicine Research
Integrative Medicine Research Medicine-Complementary and Alternative Medicine
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
2.90%
发文量
65
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Integrative Medicine Research (IMR) is a quarterly, peer-reviewed journal focused on scientific research for integrative medicine including traditional medicine (emphasis on acupuncture and herbal medicine), complementary and alternative medicine, and systems medicine. The journal includes papers on basic research, clinical research, methodology, theory, computational analysis and modelling, topical reviews, medical history, education and policy based on physiology, pathology, diagnosis and the systems approach in the field of integrative medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信