Dong Kee Jang , Jun Kyu Lee , Chan Yung Jung , Kyung Ho Kim , Ha Ra Kang , Yeon Sun Lee , Jong Hwa Yoon , Kwang Ro Joo , Min Kyu Chae , Yong Hyeon Baek , Byung-Kwan Seo , Sang Hyub Lee , Chiyeon Lim
{"title":"电针缓解急性胰腺炎患者腹痛:一项三组随机对照试验","authors":"Dong Kee Jang , Jun Kyu Lee , Chan Yung Jung , Kyung Ho Kim , Ha Ra Kang , Yeon Sun Lee , Jong Hwa Yoon , Kwang Ro Joo , Min Kyu Chae , Yong Hyeon Baek , Byung-Kwan Seo , Sang Hyub Lee , Chiyeon Lim","doi":"10.1016/j.joim.2023.10.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Electroacupuncture<span> (EA) may reduce the severity of acute pancreatitis (AP) and provide additional pain relief in patients<span> with chronic pancreatitis. However, the ability of EA to relieve pain in patients with AP has not been well documented.</span></span></p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>This study was undertaken to compare the pain-relieving effects of EA and conventional treatment in patients with AP.</p></div><div><h3>Design, setting, participants and interventions</h3><p>This study was conducted using a randomized, controlled, three-arm, parallel-group and multi-center design. Patients diagnosed with AP were randomly and equally assigned to EA1, EA2 or control groups. All participants received conventional standard-of-care therapy for AP. Local EA alone was administered in EA1, and local plus distal EA was given in EA2. Local EA included two abdominal acupoints, while distal EA included twelve peripheral acupoints. EA groups underwent one session of EA daily for 4 days (days 1–4), or until pain was resolved or discharged.</p></div><div><h3>Main outcome measures</h3><p>The primary outcome measure was the change in the visual analogue scale (VAS; 0–100) pain score between baseline and day 5.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Eighty-nine participants were randomized into EA1, EA2 and control groups, and 88 (EA1, 30; EA2, 29; control, 29) were included in the full-analysis set. VAS score change (median [interquartile range]) on day 5 was (12.3 ± 22.5) in the EA1 group, (10.3 ± 21.5) in the EA2 group, and (8.9 ± 15.2) in the control group. There were not significant differences in the change in VAS score among treatments (<em>P</em> = 0.983). However, time to food intake was significantly shorter in the EA group (EA1 + EA2) than in the control group (median 2.0 days <em>vs</em> 3.0 days), with a hazard ratio of 0.581 (<em>P</em> = 0.022; 95% CI, 0.366–0.924). No significant adverse events occurred.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>EA treatment did not significantly reduce pain after 4 days of treatment in patients with AP-associated abdominal pain but significantly reduced time to first food intake.</p><p><em>Trial registration:</em> ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03173222.</p><p><span>Please cite this article as: Jang DK, Lee JK, Jung CY, Kim KH, Kang HR, Lee YS, Yoon JH, Joo KR, Chae MK, Baek YH, Seo BK, Lee SH, Lim C. Electroacupuncture for abdominal pain relief in patients with acute pancreatitis: A three-arm randomized controlled trial. </span><em>J Integr Med</em>. 2023; 21(6): 537–542.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48599,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Integrative Medicine-Jim","volume":"21 6","pages":"Pages 537-542"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Electroacupuncture for abdominal pain relief in patients with acute pancreatitis: A three-arm randomized controlled trial\",\"authors\":\"Dong Kee Jang , Jun Kyu Lee , Chan Yung Jung , Kyung Ho Kim , Ha Ra Kang , Yeon Sun Lee , Jong Hwa Yoon , Kwang Ro Joo , Min Kyu Chae , Yong Hyeon Baek , Byung-Kwan Seo , Sang Hyub Lee , Chiyeon Lim\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.joim.2023.10.004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Electroacupuncture<span> (EA) may reduce the severity of acute pancreatitis (AP) and provide additional pain relief in patients<span> with chronic pancreatitis. However, the ability of EA to relieve pain in patients with AP has not been well documented.</span></span></p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>This study was undertaken to compare the pain-relieving effects of EA and conventional treatment in patients with AP.</p></div><div><h3>Design, setting, participants and interventions</h3><p>This study was conducted using a randomized, controlled, three-arm, parallel-group and multi-center design. Patients diagnosed with AP were randomly and equally assigned to EA1, EA2 or control groups. All participants received conventional standard-of-care therapy for AP. Local EA alone was administered in EA1, and local plus distal EA was given in EA2. Local EA included two abdominal acupoints, while distal EA included twelve peripheral acupoints. EA groups underwent one session of EA daily for 4 days (days 1–4), or until pain was resolved or discharged.</p></div><div><h3>Main outcome measures</h3><p>The primary outcome measure was the change in the visual analogue scale (VAS; 0–100) pain score between baseline and day 5.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Eighty-nine participants were randomized into EA1, EA2 and control groups, and 88 (EA1, 30; EA2, 29; control, 29) were included in the full-analysis set. VAS score change (median [interquartile range]) on day 5 was (12.3 ± 22.5) in the EA1 group, (10.3 ± 21.5) in the EA2 group, and (8.9 ± 15.2) in the control group. There were not significant differences in the change in VAS score among treatments (<em>P</em> = 0.983). However, time to food intake was significantly shorter in the EA group (EA1 + EA2) than in the control group (median 2.0 days <em>vs</em> 3.0 days), with a hazard ratio of 0.581 (<em>P</em> = 0.022; 95% CI, 0.366–0.924). No significant adverse events occurred.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>EA treatment did not significantly reduce pain after 4 days of treatment in patients with AP-associated abdominal pain but significantly reduced time to first food intake.</p><p><em>Trial registration:</em> ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03173222.</p><p><span>Please cite this article as: Jang DK, Lee JK, Jung CY, Kim KH, Kang HR, Lee YS, Yoon JH, Joo KR, Chae MK, Baek YH, Seo BK, Lee SH, Lim C. Electroacupuncture for abdominal pain relief in patients with acute pancreatitis: A three-arm randomized controlled trial. </span><em>J Integr Med</em>. 2023; 21(6): 537–542.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48599,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Integrative Medicine-Jim\",\"volume\":\"21 6\",\"pages\":\"Pages 537-542\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Integrative Medicine-Jim\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S209549642300081X\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Integrative Medicine-Jim","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S209549642300081X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:电针(EA)可以减轻急性胰腺炎(AP)的严重程度,并为慢性胰腺炎患者提供额外的疼痛缓解。然而,EA减轻AP患者疼痛的能力尚未得到很好的证明。目的比较EA治疗与常规治疗对ap患者疼痛的缓解效果。设计、环境、参与者和干预措施本研究采用随机、对照、三臂、平行组和多中心设计。诊断为AP的患者随机平均分配到EA1组、EA2组或对照组。所有参与者均接受常规的AP标准治疗。EA1仅给予局部EA治疗,EA2给予局部加远端EA治疗。局部EA包括2个腹部穴位,远端EA包括12个周围穴位。EA组每日1次,连续4天(第1-4天),或直至疼痛缓解或出院。主要观察指标主要观察指标为视觉模拟量表(VAS;0-100)疼痛评分从基线到第5天。结果89例受试者随机分为EA1组、EA2组和对照组,88例(EA1组,30例;EA2 29;对照组29例,纳入全分析组。第5天,EA1组VAS评分变化(中位数[四分位数范围])为(12.3±22.5)分,EA2组为(10.3±21.5)分,对照组为(8.9±15.2)分。两组间VAS评分变化差异无统计学意义(P = 0.983)。然而,EA组(EA1 + EA2)的进食时间明显短于对照组(中位数为2.0天vs 3.0天),风险比为0.581 (P = 0.022;95% ci, 0.366-0.924)。无明显不良事件发生。结论ea治疗对ap相关性腹痛患者治疗4 d后疼痛无明显缓解作用,但可显著缩短首次进食时间。试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov标识符NCT03173222。本文题目为:张德奎,李建军,Jung CY, Kim KH, Kang HR, Lee YS, Yoon JH, Joo KR, Chae MK, Baek YH, Seo BK, Lee SH, Lim c。电针缓解急性胰腺炎患者腹痛的三组随机对照试验。中华医学杂志;2009;21(6): 537 - 542。
Electroacupuncture for abdominal pain relief in patients with acute pancreatitis: A three-arm randomized controlled trial
Background
Electroacupuncture (EA) may reduce the severity of acute pancreatitis (AP) and provide additional pain relief in patients with chronic pancreatitis. However, the ability of EA to relieve pain in patients with AP has not been well documented.
Objective
This study was undertaken to compare the pain-relieving effects of EA and conventional treatment in patients with AP.
Design, setting, participants and interventions
This study was conducted using a randomized, controlled, three-arm, parallel-group and multi-center design. Patients diagnosed with AP were randomly and equally assigned to EA1, EA2 or control groups. All participants received conventional standard-of-care therapy for AP. Local EA alone was administered in EA1, and local plus distal EA was given in EA2. Local EA included two abdominal acupoints, while distal EA included twelve peripheral acupoints. EA groups underwent one session of EA daily for 4 days (days 1–4), or until pain was resolved or discharged.
Main outcome measures
The primary outcome measure was the change in the visual analogue scale (VAS; 0–100) pain score between baseline and day 5.
Results
Eighty-nine participants were randomized into EA1, EA2 and control groups, and 88 (EA1, 30; EA2, 29; control, 29) were included in the full-analysis set. VAS score change (median [interquartile range]) on day 5 was (12.3 ± 22.5) in the EA1 group, (10.3 ± 21.5) in the EA2 group, and (8.9 ± 15.2) in the control group. There were not significant differences in the change in VAS score among treatments (P = 0.983). However, time to food intake was significantly shorter in the EA group (EA1 + EA2) than in the control group (median 2.0 days vs 3.0 days), with a hazard ratio of 0.581 (P = 0.022; 95% CI, 0.366–0.924). No significant adverse events occurred.
Conclusion
EA treatment did not significantly reduce pain after 4 days of treatment in patients with AP-associated abdominal pain but significantly reduced time to first food intake.
Please cite this article as: Jang DK, Lee JK, Jung CY, Kim KH, Kang HR, Lee YS, Yoon JH, Joo KR, Chae MK, Baek YH, Seo BK, Lee SH, Lim C. Electroacupuncture for abdominal pain relief in patients with acute pancreatitis: A three-arm randomized controlled trial. J Integr Med. 2023; 21(6): 537–542.
期刊介绍:
The predecessor of JIM is the Journal of Chinese Integrative Medicine (Zhong Xi Yi Jie He Xue Bao). With this new, English-language publication, we are committed to make JIM an international platform for publishing high-quality papers on complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) and an open forum in which the different professions and international scholarly communities can exchange views, share research and their clinical experience, discuss CAM education, and confer about issues and problems in our various disciplines and in CAM as a whole in order to promote integrative medicine.
JIM is indexed/abstracted in: MEDLINE/PubMed, ScienceDirect, Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI), Scopus, Embase, Chemical Abstracts (CA), CAB Abstracts, EBSCO, WPRIM, JST China, Chinese Science Citation Database (CSCD), and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI).
JIM Editorial Office uses ThomsonReuters ScholarOne Manuscripts as submitting and review system (submission link: http://mc03.manuscriptcentral.com/jcim-en).
JIM is published bimonthly. Manuscripts submitted to JIM should be written in English. Article types include but are not limited to randomized controlled and pragmatic trials, translational and patient-centered effectiveness outcome studies, case series and reports, clinical trial protocols, preclinical and basic science studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, papers on methodology and CAM history or education, conference proceedings, editorials, commentaries, short communications, book reviews, and letters to the editor.
Our purpose is to publish a prestigious international journal for studies in integrative medicine. To achieve this aim, we seek to publish high-quality papers on any aspects of integrative medicine, such as acupuncture and traditional Chinese medicine, Ayurveda medicine, herbal medicine, homeopathy, nutrition, chiropractic, mind-body medicine, taichi, qigong, meditation, and any other modalities of CAM; our commitment to international scope ensures that research and progress from all regions of the world are widely covered. These ensure that articles published in JIM have the maximum exposure to the international scholarly community.
JIM can help its authors let their papers reach the widest possible range of readers, and let all those who share an interest in their research field be concerned with their study.