Effects of Different Electroacupuncture Frequencies in Young Adults with Chronic Neck Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Journal of Pain Research Pub Date : 2026-09-28 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.2147/JPR.S638747
Qiu-Yue Tu, Zi-Yi He, Jian-Peng Huang, Jian-Hua Liu
{"title":"Effects of Different Electroacupuncture Frequencies in Young Adults with Chronic Neck Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Qiu-Yue Tu, Zi-Yi He, Jian-Peng Huang, Jian-Hua Liu","doi":"10.2147/JPR.S638747","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Chronic neck pain (CNP) is a common musculoskeletal disorder and a major contributor to disability. Although acupuncture is beneficial for CNP, evidence on the optimal treatment frequency, particularly in young adults, remains limited.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the clinical efficacy of different electroacupuncture treatment frequencies in young adults with CNP.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this single-center, three-arm randomized controlled trial, 90 young adults with CNP were randomized 1:1:1 to three sessions per week (TSWA), one session per week (OSWA), or a waiting-list control (WL). Both acupuncture groups received bilateral electroacupuncture at Jingbailao (EX-HN15) and Jianzhongshu (SI15) for 30 min per session for 4 weeks. Participants and the treating acupuncturist were not blinded; outcome assessors and statisticians were blinded. The primary outcome was the Northwick Park Questionnaire (NPQ). Secondary outcomes were VAS, SF-MPQ, PPT, and PTO. Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle with multiple imputation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All 90 randomized participants were included in the analysis. Significant group-by-time interactions were observed for all outcomes (all P < 0.001). At week 4, both acupuncture groups were superior to WL. TSWA was also superior to OSWA for NPQ (P = 0.0196), VAS (P = 0.0042), SF-MPQ (P = 0.0200), and PTO (P = 0.0038), but not PPT (P = 0.0869). At 4-week follow-up, TSWA remained superior to OSWA only for VAS (P = 0.007); NPQ and SF-MPQ no longer differed significantly between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both treatment frequencies improved pain, functional disability, and selected pain-threshold outcomes compared with WL. Three sessions per week produced greater short-term benefit, but its longer-term advantage was limited and was retained only for VAS at follow-up.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>International Traditional Medicine Clinical Trial Registry, ITMCTR2025001658.</p>","PeriodicalId":16661,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pain Research","volume":"19 ","pages":"638747"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13632621/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pain Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/JPR.S638747","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Chronic neck pain (CNP) is a common musculoskeletal disorder and a major contributor to disability. Although acupuncture is beneficial for CNP, evidence on the optimal treatment frequency, particularly in young adults, remains limited.

Objective: To compare the clinical efficacy of different electroacupuncture treatment frequencies in young adults with CNP.

Methods: In this single-center, three-arm randomized controlled trial, 90 young adults with CNP were randomized 1:1:1 to three sessions per week (TSWA), one session per week (OSWA), or a waiting-list control (WL). Both acupuncture groups received bilateral electroacupuncture at Jingbailao (EX-HN15) and Jianzhongshu (SI15) for 30 min per session for 4 weeks. Participants and the treating acupuncturist were not blinded; outcome assessors and statisticians were blinded. The primary outcome was the Northwick Park Questionnaire (NPQ). Secondary outcomes were VAS, SF-MPQ, PPT, and PTO. Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle with multiple imputation.

Results: All 90 randomized participants were included in the analysis. Significant group-by-time interactions were observed for all outcomes (all P < 0.001). At week 4, both acupuncture groups were superior to WL. TSWA was also superior to OSWA for NPQ (P = 0.0196), VAS (P = 0.0042), SF-MPQ (P = 0.0200), and PTO (P = 0.0038), but not PPT (P = 0.0869). At 4-week follow-up, TSWA remained superior to OSWA only for VAS (P = 0.007); NPQ and SF-MPQ no longer differed significantly between groups.

Conclusion: Both treatment frequencies improved pain, functional disability, and selected pain-threshold outcomes compared with WL. Three sessions per week produced greater short-term benefit, but its longer-term advantage was limited and was retained only for VAS at follow-up.

Trial registration: International Traditional Medicine Clinical Trial Registry, ITMCTR2025001658.

不同电针频率对年轻成人慢性颈部疼痛的影响:一项随机对照试验。
背景:慢性颈部疼痛(CNP)是一种常见的肌肉骨骼疾病,也是导致残疾的主要原因。虽然针灸对CNP有益,但关于最佳治疗频率的证据,特别是在年轻人中,仍然有限。目的:比较不同电针频率治疗青壮年CNP的临床疗效。方法:在这项单中心、三组随机对照试验中,90名患有CNP的年轻成年人以1:1:1的比例随机分为每周三次(TSWA)、每周一次(OSWA)或等待名单对照组(WL)。两组均采用双侧电针静白老(EX-HN15)和建中枢(SI15),每次30分钟,连续4周。参与者和治疗针灸师没有被蒙蔽;结果评估者和统计学家采用盲法。主要结果是诺斯威克公园问卷(NPQ)。次要指标为VAS、SF-MPQ、PPT和PTO。分析遵循意图-处理原则和多重归算。结果:90名随机受试者均纳入分析。所有结果均观察到显著的组间时间相互作用(均P < 0.001)。在第4周,两组针刺均优于WL。TSWA在NPQ (P = 0.0196)、VAS (P = 0.0042)、SF-MPQ (P = 0.0200)和PTO (P = 0.0038)方面也优于OSWA,但PPT (P = 0.0869)不优于OSWA。随访4周时,TSWA仍优于仅VAS的OSWA (P = 0.007);NPQ和SF-MPQ组间差异不再显著。结论:与WL相比,两种治疗频率都改善了疼痛、功能障碍和选定的疼痛阈值结果。每周三次治疗产生了更大的短期效益,但其长期优势有限,仅在VAS随访时保留。试验注册:国际传统医学临床试验注册中心,ITMCTR2025001658。
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
Journal of Pain Research
Journal of Pain Research CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
3.70%
发文量
411
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Pain Research is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal that welcomes laboratory and clinical findings in the fields of pain research and the prevention and management of pain. Original research, reviews, symposium reports, hypothesis formation and commentaries are all considered for publication. Additionally, the journal now welcomes the submission of pain-policy-related editorials and commentaries, particularly in regard to ethical, regulatory, forensic, and other legal issues in pain medicine, and to the education of pain practitioners and researchers.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书