Acupuncture or cupping plus standard care versus standard care in moderate to severe COVID-19 patients: An assessor-blinded, randomized, controlled trial

IF 2.8 4区 医学 Q2 INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE
Reihane Alipour , Saeidreza Jamalimoghadamsiahkali , Mehrdad Karimi , Asma Asadi , Haleh Ghaem , Mohammad Sadegh Adel-Mehraban , Amir Hooman Kazemi
{"title":"Acupuncture or cupping plus standard care versus standard care in moderate to severe COVID-19 patients: An assessor-blinded, randomized, controlled trial","authors":"Reihane Alipour ,&nbsp;Saeidreza Jamalimoghadamsiahkali ,&nbsp;Mehrdad Karimi ,&nbsp;Asma Asadi ,&nbsp;Haleh Ghaem ,&nbsp;Mohammad Sadegh Adel-Mehraban ,&nbsp;Amir Hooman Kazemi","doi":"10.1016/j.imr.2022.100898","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Non-pharmacological strategies that have been proposed by complementary medical systems, can be effective in management of COVID-19.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This study was designed as a three-arm, assessor-blinded, randomized controlled trial. A total of 139 hospitalized COVID-19 patients were randomly assigned into three groups: (1) acupuncture (ACUG), (2) cupping (CUPG), and (3) control (CTRG). All participants received conventional treatment. The primary study endpoint included changes in respiratory signs including oxygen saturation (SpO<sub>2</sub>) and respiratory rate (RR). The secondary endpoints were COVID-19-related hospitalization duration and serious adverse events such as intensive care unit (ICU) admission, intubation or death, all up to day 30. Also, improvements in cough, dyspnea, chest tightness, oxygen demand, anorexia, headache, weakness, sore throat, and myalgia were evaluated.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Forty-two patients in ACUG, 44 patients in CUPG, and 42 patients in CTRG completed the trial. After 3 days, SpO<sub>2</sub> and RR improved significantly in CUPG and ACUG compared with CTRG (effect size: 8.49 (6.4 to 10.57) and 8.51 (6.67 to 10.34), respectively: p&lt;0.001). Compared with CTRG, patients in CUPG and ACUG recovered faster (mean difference: 6.58 (4.8 to 8.35) and 9.16 (7.16 to 11.15), respectively) and except for two patients in ACUG who were admitted to ICU, none of patients in ACUG or CUPG needed ICU or intubation (p&lt;0.001 in comparison to CTRG). Amelioration of clinical COVID-19 related symptoms reached a high level of statistical significance in CUPG and ACUG in comparison with CTRG (p&lt;0.01).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Cupping and acupuncture are promising safe and effective therapies in management of COVID-19. Trial registration: This study was registered at Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials: IRCT20201127049504N1 (<span>https://en.irct.ir/trial/52621</span><svg><path></path></svg>).</p></div>","PeriodicalId":13644,"journal":{"name":"Integrative Medicine Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/18/42/main.PMC9617672.pdf","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Integrative Medicine Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213422022000658","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: 3

Abstract

Background

Non-pharmacological strategies that have been proposed by complementary medical systems, can be effective in management of COVID-19.

Methods

This study was designed as a three-arm, assessor-blinded, randomized controlled trial. A total of 139 hospitalized COVID-19 patients were randomly assigned into three groups: (1) acupuncture (ACUG), (2) cupping (CUPG), and (3) control (CTRG). All participants received conventional treatment. The primary study endpoint included changes in respiratory signs including oxygen saturation (SpO2) and respiratory rate (RR). The secondary endpoints were COVID-19-related hospitalization duration and serious adverse events such as intensive care unit (ICU) admission, intubation or death, all up to day 30. Also, improvements in cough, dyspnea, chest tightness, oxygen demand, anorexia, headache, weakness, sore throat, and myalgia were evaluated.

Results

Forty-two patients in ACUG, 44 patients in CUPG, and 42 patients in CTRG completed the trial. After 3 days, SpO2 and RR improved significantly in CUPG and ACUG compared with CTRG (effect size: 8.49 (6.4 to 10.57) and 8.51 (6.67 to 10.34), respectively: p<0.001). Compared with CTRG, patients in CUPG and ACUG recovered faster (mean difference: 6.58 (4.8 to 8.35) and 9.16 (7.16 to 11.15), respectively) and except for two patients in ACUG who were admitted to ICU, none of patients in ACUG or CUPG needed ICU or intubation (p<0.001 in comparison to CTRG). Amelioration of clinical COVID-19 related symptoms reached a high level of statistical significance in CUPG and ACUG in comparison with CTRG (p<0.01).

Conclusion

Cupping and acupuncture are promising safe and effective therapies in management of COVID-19. Trial registration: This study was registered at Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials: IRCT20201127049504N1 (https://en.irct.ir/trial/52621).

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

中重度COVID-19患者针灸或拔罐加标准治疗与标准治疗:一项评估盲、随机对照试验
补充医疗系统提出的非药物策略可有效管理COVID-19。方法本研究设计为三组、评估盲、随机对照试验。139例新冠肺炎住院患者随机分为针刺组(ACUG)、拔火罐组(CUPG)和对照组(CTRG)。所有参与者均接受常规治疗。主要研究终点包括呼吸体征的变化,包括血氧饱和度(SpO2)和呼吸速率(RR)。次要终点是与covid -19相关的住院时间和严重不良事件,如重症监护病房(ICU)入院、插管或死亡,全部持续到第30天。此外,咳嗽、呼吸困难、胸闷、耗氧量、厌食症、头痛、虚弱、喉咙痛和肌痛的改善情况也进行了评估。结果ACUG组42例,CUPG组44例,CTRG组42例完成试验。3 d后,与CTRG相比,CUPG和ACUG的SpO2和RR显著改善(效应值分别为8.49(6.4 ~ 10.57)和8.51 (6.67 ~ 10.34):p<0.001)。与CTRG组相比,cuug组和ACUG组患者恢复更快(平均差值分别为6.58(4.8 ~ 8.35)和9.16(7.16 ~ 11.15)),除2例ACUG组患者入住ICU外,ACUG组和cuug组患者均无需ICU或插管(与CTRG组相比差值为0.001)。与CTRG组相比,CUPG组和ACUG组临床COVID-19相关症状的改善具有高度统计学意义(p<0.01)。结论拔火罐和针刺治疗新冠肺炎是一种安全有效的治疗方法。试验注册:本研究在伊朗临床试验注册中心注册:IRCT20201127049504N1 (https://en.irct.ir/trial/52621)。
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