耳针指压对慢性肌肉骨骼疼痛的疗效:随机对照试验的系统回顾和元分析》(The Effectiveness of Auricular Acupressure on Chronic Musculkeletal Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials)。

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE
Tony Kwok Wing Lee, Jeremy R Chang, Dongfang Hao, Siu-Ngor Fu, Arnold Yu Lok Wong
{"title":"耳针指压对慢性肌肉骨骼疼痛的疗效:随机对照试验的系统回顾和元分析》(The Effectiveness of Auricular Acupressure on Chronic Musculkeletal Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials)。","authors":"Tony Kwok Wing Lee, Jeremy R Chang, Dongfang Hao, Siu-Ngor Fu, Arnold Yu Lok Wong","doi":"10.1089/jicm.2023.0630","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Objectives:</i></b> To assess the effectiveness of auricular acupressure (AA) in managing pain and disability in individuals with chronic musculoskeletal pain. <b><i>Materials and Methods:</i></b> A systematic search on six electronic databases was performed from their inception to May 7, 2023, to identified relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Two independent reviewers screened the abstracts and full texts, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using RoB 2. The primary outcomes were pain intensity and disability. The secondary outcomes were pain pressure thresholds, pain catastrophizing level, and fear avoidance beliefs. A random-effects model was used for meta-analyses. The certainty of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. Sensitivity analyses were conducted after removing low-quality papers. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Of 633 identified records, six studies involving 496 participants were included. All included studies compared the effectiveness of AA with sham controls in treating various chronic musculoskeletal pain. Four meta-analyses were conducted to compare the effectiveness of AA with sham controls. Low-quality evidence supported that AA had a large effect size on postintervention subjective pain reduction (standardized mean difference [SMD] = -0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.36 to -0.54; p = 0.00; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 52.61%); moderate-quality evidence substantiated that AA had a large effect size on enhancing postintervention pressure pain threshold (SMD = -0.55; 95% CI: -0.88 to -0.23; <i>p</i> = 0.00; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%). There was low-quality evidence that AA had a large effect on reducing postintervention disability (SMD = -0.68; 95% CI: -1.24 to -0.12; <i>p</i> = 0.02; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 51.33%). Our sensitivity analysis reaffirmed the same conclusion regarding pain reduction immediately after the intervention. Fourteen participants reported minimal adverse events, including soreness, tenderness, irritation, and redness, which disappeared within 1-7 days. <b><i>Discussion:</i></b> Our systematic review revealed that AA significantly improved pain, pressure pain thresholds, and disability in individuals with various chronic musculoskeletal pain conditions immediately post-treatment compared with sham treatment. Given the paucity of studies and inconsistent protocols, future RCTs are warranted to evaluate the effectiveness of AA in people with chronic musculoskeletal pain at a longer follow-up with detailed protocols, which allows researchers and clinicians to optimize AA intervention. <b><i>Conclusion</i></b>: AA has immediate post-treatment benefits for chronic musculoskeletal pain, whereas its effects at the 1- or 6-month follow-up remain uncertain.</p>","PeriodicalId":29734,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Integrative and Complementary Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Effectiveness of Auricular Acupressure on Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.\",\"authors\":\"Tony Kwok Wing Lee, Jeremy R Chang, Dongfang Hao, Siu-Ngor Fu, Arnold Yu Lok Wong\",\"doi\":\"10.1089/jicm.2023.0630\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b><i>Objectives:</i></b> To assess the effectiveness of auricular acupressure (AA) in managing pain and disability in individuals with chronic musculoskeletal pain. <b><i>Materials and Methods:</i></b> A systematic search on six electronic databases was performed from their inception to May 7, 2023, to identified relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Two independent reviewers screened the abstracts and full texts, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using RoB 2. The primary outcomes were pain intensity and disability. The secondary outcomes were pain pressure thresholds, pain catastrophizing level, and fear avoidance beliefs. A random-effects model was used for meta-analyses. The certainty of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. Sensitivity analyses were conducted after removing low-quality papers. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Of 633 identified records, six studies involving 496 participants were included. All included studies compared the effectiveness of AA with sham controls in treating various chronic musculoskeletal pain. Four meta-analyses were conducted to compare the effectiveness of AA with sham controls. Low-quality evidence supported that AA had a large effect size on postintervention subjective pain reduction (standardized mean difference [SMD] = -0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.36 to -0.54; p = 0.00; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 52.61%); moderate-quality evidence substantiated that AA had a large effect size on enhancing postintervention pressure pain threshold (SMD = -0.55; 95% CI: -0.88 to -0.23; <i>p</i> = 0.00; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%). There was low-quality evidence that AA had a large effect on reducing postintervention disability (SMD = -0.68; 95% CI: -1.24 to -0.12; <i>p</i> = 0.02; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 51.33%). Our sensitivity analysis reaffirmed the same conclusion regarding pain reduction immediately after the intervention. Fourteen participants reported minimal adverse events, including soreness, tenderness, irritation, and redness, which disappeared within 1-7 days. <b><i>Discussion:</i></b> Our systematic review revealed that AA significantly improved pain, pressure pain thresholds, and disability in individuals with various chronic musculoskeletal pain conditions immediately post-treatment compared with sham treatment. Given the paucity of studies and inconsistent protocols, future RCTs are warranted to evaluate the effectiveness of AA in people with chronic musculoskeletal pain at a longer follow-up with detailed protocols, which allows researchers and clinicians to optimize AA intervention. <b><i>Conclusion</i></b>: AA has immediate post-treatment benefits for chronic musculoskeletal pain, whereas its effects at the 1- or 6-month follow-up remain uncertain.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":29734,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Integrative and Complementary Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Integrative and Complementary Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1089/jicm.2023.0630\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Integrative and Complementary Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/jicm.2023.0630","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的评估耳穴穴位按摩(AA)在控制慢性肌肉骨骼疼痛患者的疼痛和残疾方面的效果。材料与方法:从开始到 2023 年 5 月 7 日,对六个电子数据库进行了系统检索,以确定相关的随机对照试验 (RCT)。两名独立审稿人筛选了摘要和全文,提取了数据,并使用 RoB 2 评估了偏倚风险。次要结果为疼痛压力阈值、疼痛灾难化程度和恐惧回避信念。荟萃分析采用随机效应模型。证据的确定性采用 "建议评估、发展和评价分级"(Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation)进行评估。剔除低质量论文后进行了敏感性分析。结果在确定的 633 条记录中,纳入了涉及 496 名参与者的 6 项研究。所有纳入的研究都比较了 AA 与假对照治疗各种慢性肌肉骨骼疼痛的效果。研究人员进行了四项荟萃分析,以比较 AA 与假对照组的疗效。低质量证据证实,AA 对干预后主观疼痛减轻的影响较大(标准化平均差 [SMD] = -0.95;95% 置信区间 [CI]:-1.36 至 -0.54;P = 0.00;I2 = 52.61%);中等质量证据证实,AA 对提高干预后压力痛阈的影响较大(SMD = -0.55;95% 置信区间 [CI]:-0.88 至 -0.23;P = 0.00;I2 = 0%)。有低质量证据表明,AA 对减少干预后残疾有很大影响(SMD = -0.68;95% CI:-1.24 至 -0.12;p = 0.02;I2 = 51.33%)。我们的敏感性分析再次证实了关于干预后疼痛立即减轻的相同结论。14名参与者报告了轻微的不良反应,包括酸痛、触痛、刺激和发红,这些症状在1-7天内消失。讨论我们的系统综述显示,与假治疗相比,AA 在治疗后立即明显改善了各种慢性肌肉骨骼疼痛患者的疼痛、压痛阈值和残疾状况。鉴于研究较少且方案不一致,未来有必要进行 RCT 研究,以评估 AA 对慢性肌肉骨骼疼痛患者的疗效,并制定详细的方案进行长期随访,以便研究人员和临床医生优化 AA 干预。结论AA治疗后对慢性肌肉骨骼疼痛有立竿见影的疗效,但1个月或6个月随访的效果仍不确定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Effectiveness of Auricular Acupressure on Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of auricular acupressure (AA) in managing pain and disability in individuals with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Materials and Methods: A systematic search on six electronic databases was performed from their inception to May 7, 2023, to identified relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Two independent reviewers screened the abstracts and full texts, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using RoB 2. The primary outcomes were pain intensity and disability. The secondary outcomes were pain pressure thresholds, pain catastrophizing level, and fear avoidance beliefs. A random-effects model was used for meta-analyses. The certainty of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. Sensitivity analyses were conducted after removing low-quality papers. Results: Of 633 identified records, six studies involving 496 participants were included. All included studies compared the effectiveness of AA with sham controls in treating various chronic musculoskeletal pain. Four meta-analyses were conducted to compare the effectiveness of AA with sham controls. Low-quality evidence supported that AA had a large effect size on postintervention subjective pain reduction (standardized mean difference [SMD] = -0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.36 to -0.54; p = 0.00; I2 = 52.61%); moderate-quality evidence substantiated that AA had a large effect size on enhancing postintervention pressure pain threshold (SMD = -0.55; 95% CI: -0.88 to -0.23; p = 0.00; I2 = 0%). There was low-quality evidence that AA had a large effect on reducing postintervention disability (SMD = -0.68; 95% CI: -1.24 to -0.12; p = 0.02; I2 = 51.33%). Our sensitivity analysis reaffirmed the same conclusion regarding pain reduction immediately after the intervention. Fourteen participants reported minimal adverse events, including soreness, tenderness, irritation, and redness, which disappeared within 1-7 days. Discussion: Our systematic review revealed that AA significantly improved pain, pressure pain thresholds, and disability in individuals with various chronic musculoskeletal pain conditions immediately post-treatment compared with sham treatment. Given the paucity of studies and inconsistent protocols, future RCTs are warranted to evaluate the effectiveness of AA in people with chronic musculoskeletal pain at a longer follow-up with detailed protocols, which allows researchers and clinicians to optimize AA intervention. Conclusion: AA has immediate post-treatment benefits for chronic musculoskeletal pain, whereas its effects at the 1- or 6-month follow-up remain uncertain.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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