Effect of thumbtack needle on functional constipation: A pragmatic randomized controlled trial

IF 4.3 3区 材料科学 Q1 ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC
Li Dan , Zhang Guilin , Zhang Linxue , Tang Yao , Wang Li , Xu Ying , Cao Jinkui , Zhao Wenqian , Zuo Guanchao , Li Hang , Li Dehua
{"title":"Effect of thumbtack needle on functional constipation: A pragmatic randomized controlled trial","authors":"Li Dan ,&nbsp;Zhang Guilin ,&nbsp;Zhang Linxue ,&nbsp;Tang Yao ,&nbsp;Wang Li ,&nbsp;Xu Ying ,&nbsp;Cao Jinkui ,&nbsp;Zhao Wenqian ,&nbsp;Zuo Guanchao ,&nbsp;Li Hang ,&nbsp;Li Dehua","doi":"10.1016/j.ctim.2024.103069","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Thumbtack Needling (TN) has been employed in the treatment of functional constipation (FC), although the existing evidence supporting its effectiveness is limited. This study is to evaluate the efficacy of TN in ameliorating FC.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>A total of 482 eligible patients were recruited and randomly assigned to the TN group or the Mosapride Citrate (MC) group. The TN was buried once for three days, rest for one day after two consecutive burials, followed by a 4-week follow-up. The primary outcome measure was the score for Complete and spontaneous bowel movement score (CSBMs). Secondary outcome measures included the Bristol Stool Form Scale (BSFS), Cleveland Clinic Score (CCS), and the Patient Assessment of Constipation Quality of Life Questionnaire (PAC-QOL).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Out of the 482 patients randomized, 241 were allocated to each group. Of these, 216 patients (89.6 %) in both groups completed the intervention and follow-up. Compared with the baseline, the differences of CSBMs in TN group [1.76(95 % CI, 1.61 to 1.91)] and MC group [1.35(95 % CI, 1.20 to 1.50)] at week 4 meet the threshold for minimal clinically important difference (MCID). However, there were no clinical difference from baseline at week 2 and week 8 in both groups. Mean CSBMs at week 4 was 3.35 ± 0.99 in the TN group and 3 ± 1.03 in the MC group (adjusted difference between groups, 0.37 points [95 % CI, 0.18 to 0.55]; <em>P</em> &lt; 0.001), although differences between the two groups did not meet the MCID threshold.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Compared with mosapride citrate, thumbtack needling produced a greater improvement in CSBMs, although the difference from control was not clinically significant.</p></div><div><h3>ClinicalTrials.gov identifier</h3><p>ChiCTR2100043684</p></div>","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965229924000578/pdfft?md5=9c6a4a24a6595bcb0be389096ac39479&pid=1-s2.0-S0965229924000578-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965229924000578","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

Thumbtack Needling (TN) has been employed in the treatment of functional constipation (FC), although the existing evidence supporting its effectiveness is limited. This study is to evaluate the efficacy of TN in ameliorating FC.

Method

A total of 482 eligible patients were recruited and randomly assigned to the TN group or the Mosapride Citrate (MC) group. The TN was buried once for three days, rest for one day after two consecutive burials, followed by a 4-week follow-up. The primary outcome measure was the score for Complete and spontaneous bowel movement score (CSBMs). Secondary outcome measures included the Bristol Stool Form Scale (BSFS), Cleveland Clinic Score (CCS), and the Patient Assessment of Constipation Quality of Life Questionnaire (PAC-QOL).

Results

Out of the 482 patients randomized, 241 were allocated to each group. Of these, 216 patients (89.6 %) in both groups completed the intervention and follow-up. Compared with the baseline, the differences of CSBMs in TN group [1.76(95 % CI, 1.61 to 1.91)] and MC group [1.35(95 % CI, 1.20 to 1.50)] at week 4 meet the threshold for minimal clinically important difference (MCID). However, there were no clinical difference from baseline at week 2 and week 8 in both groups. Mean CSBMs at week 4 was 3.35 ± 0.99 in the TN group and 3 ± 1.03 in the MC group (adjusted difference between groups, 0.37 points [95 % CI, 0.18 to 0.55]; P < 0.001), although differences between the two groups did not meet the MCID threshold.

Conclusion

Compared with mosapride citrate, thumbtack needling produced a greater improvement in CSBMs, although the difference from control was not clinically significant.

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier

ChiCTR2100043684

拇指针对功能性便秘的影响:一项务实的随机对照试验。
目的:拇指针刺疗法(TN)已被用于治疗功能性便秘(FC),但支持其有效性的现有证据有限。本研究旨在评估拇指针在改善功能性便秘方面的疗效:方法:共招募了 482 名符合条件的患者,并将其随机分配到 TN 组或枸橼酸莫沙必利(MC)组。TN埋葬一次,为期三天,连续埋葬两次后休息一天,然后进行为期四周的随访。主要结局指标为完全和自发性排便评分(CSBMs)。次要结果指标包括布里斯托粪便形式量表(BSFS)、克利夫兰诊所评分(CCS)和便秘患者生活质量评估问卷(PAC-QOL):在随机抽取的 482 名患者中,有 241 人被分配到各组。其中,两组中均有 216 名患者(89.6%)完成了干预和随访。与基线相比,TN 组和 MC 组在第 4 周时的 CSBMs 差异[1.76(95% CI,1.61 至 1.91)]和[1.35(95% CI,1.20 至 1.50)]达到了最小临床重要差异(MCID)的临界值。不过,两组在第 2 周和第 8 周时与基线相比均无临床差异。第4周时,TN组的平均CSBM为(3.35±0.99)分,MC组为(3±1.03)分(组间调整后差异为0.37分[95% CI,0.18至0.55];P <0.001),但两组间的差异未达到MCID阈值:结论:与枸橼酸莫沙必利相比,拇指针刺对CSBMs的改善更大,但与对照组的差异无临床意义:Gov 标识符:ChiCTR2100043684。
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
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
567
×
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