Table 2.
Study Design, Population, Outcome Measures, and Results Summary
| Reference | Study design | Study population | Acupuncture intervention | Acupuncture course | Control intervention | Outcome measures | Reported findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Li 200445 | 3-arm RCT |
n = 480 Bell's palsy China Outpatients |
Acupuncture, moxibustion | Treatment course: 5× per week for 4 weeks (20 total) | 1. Acupuncture, moxibustion, prednisone, vitamin B1, dibasole P.O., vitamin B12 i.m. 2. Prednisone, vitamin B1, dibasole P.O., vitamin B12 i.m. |
House–Brackmann Scale, FDIP, FDIS, Improvement Scalee |
Active intervention group vs. Control 2: Improvement Scale significantly better in active intervention (p < 0.05), “cured” (p = 0.013), “Obviously Improved” (p = 0.024); House–Brackmann (p = 0.005), FDIP (p = 0.009) Acupuncture Control 1 vs. Control 2 “Obviously Improved” (p = 0.014), House–Brackmann (p = 0.005), FDIP (p = 0.009) |
| Tong 200959 | 3-arm RCT |
n = 119 Bell's palsy China Outpatients |
Acupuncture, eye care, education | Treatment course: 3× per week until recovery or up to 3 months | 1. Prednisolone + pepcidine P.O., eye care, education 2. Eye care, home facial exercises, education |
House–Brackmann Scale |
Acupuncture vs. Control 1 vs. Control 2: No significant difference in rate of recovery among the three groups Overall improvement to Grade 3 or better: 96.4% acupuncture vs. 86.9% Control 1 vs. 89.5% Control 2 |
| Khosrawi 201260 | 2-arm RCT |
n = 64 CTS Iran Outpatients |
Acupuncture, nightly wrist splinting | Treatment course: 2× per week for 4 weeks (8 total) | Sham acupuncture, vitamins B1 and B6 P.O. | NCS including DML, DSL, SNCV, GSS |
Post vs. pre intervention: Acupuncture group GSS improvement (p < 0.001) Control group GSS unchanged (p = 0.17) Acupuncture group SNCV faster (p = 0.02) Acupuncture vs. control at 4-week follow-up: GSS improvement (p < 0.001) DSL improvement (p = 0.07) SNCV improvement (p = 0.02) |
| Kumnerddee 201061 | 2-arm RCT |
n = 61 CTS Thailand Outpatients |
Electroacupuncture | Treatment course: 2× per week for 5 weeks (10 total) | Nightly wrist splinting | BCTS including Symptom Severity Scale (SSS) and Functional Status Scale (FSS), VAS |
Post vs. pre intervention: Acupuncture group reduction in SSS, FSS, and VAS score (p < 0.05) Control group reduction in SSS (p = 0.008), no change in FSS and VAS Acupuncture vs. control: Greater VAS reduction in the acupuncture group (p = 0.028) |
| Yao 201262 | 2-arm RCT |
n = 41 CTS USA Outpatients |
Acupuncture, nightly wrist splinting | Treatment course: six weekly sessions | Sham acupuncture six weekly sessions, nightly wrist splinting | NCS including: DML, CMAP amplitude, CSI, CTSAQ Scale, key- and tip-pinch assessment |
Post vs. pre intervention CTSAQ: Acupuncture group (p < 0.05) Control group (p < 0.05) 3-month follow-up CTSAQ improvement: Acupuncture group (p = 0.17) Control group (p = 0.02) 3-month tip-pinch, key-pinch, CSI: No difference from baseline for either group Acupuncture vs. control: No difference in CTSAQ post intervention |
| Yang 200956 | 2-arm RCT |
n = 77 CTS China Outpatients |
Acupuncture | Treatment course: 2× per week for 4 weeks (8 total) | Prednisolone P.O. daily for 4 weeks | NCS including: DML, CMAP amplitude, MNCV, DSL, SNAP amplitude, W-P SNCV, GSS |
Post vs. pre intervention: GSS acupuncture group (p < 0.01) GSS control group (p < 0.01) NCS acupuncture group: decrease in DML, DSL, increase in W-P SNCV, SNAP amplitudes (p < 0.05) NCS control group: decrease in DML, DSL, Increase in W-P SNCV, SNAP amplitudes, APB CMAP amplitude (p < 0.05) Acupuncture vs. control at 4-week follow-up: GSS improvement post treatment (p = 0.15) Nocturnal awakening post treatment (p = 0.03) DML improvement (p = 0.012) |
| Yang 2011 (LTF)55 | Same | Same | Same | Same | Same | Same |
Post vs. pre intervention: 13-month acupuncture group NCS all different from baseline except for MNCV 13-month control group NCS no different from baseline except for MNCV, W-P CNCV (p < 0.01), DSL (p < 0.05) Acupuncture vs. control: Improved 7- and 13-month GSS (p < 0.01) Improved DML and MNCV at 13 months (p < 0.01) |
| Yu 200119 | 2-arm RCT |
n = 78 DM China Inpatients |
Electroacupuncture | Treatment course: 10 daily sessions × 3 Break: 3 days |
Thiamine P.O., vitamin B12 i.m.—same course | NCV, blood rheology, neurologic exam, symptomatic improvement, Improvement Scalea |
Acupuncture vs. control: Overall improvement (p < 0.01) NCV pre treatment (p > 0.05) NCV post treatment (p < 0.01) Post- vs. pre-intervention rheology: Acupuncture group (p < 0.01) Control group (p > 0.05) |
| Zhang 201063 | 2-arm RCT |
n = 65 DM China Outpatients |
Acupuncture | Treatment course: 14 daily sessions × 5 Break: 5 days |
Inositol P.O. daily for 3 months | Neurologic exam, symptomatic improvement, Improvement Scaleb |
Acupuncture vs. control: Overall improvement (p < 0.05) |
| Zheng 200464 | 2-arm RCT |
n = 104 DM China Outpatients |
Acupuncture, electroacupuncture, snow lotus i.v. | Treatment course: 10 every other day sessions × 2 | Mecobalamin P.O. daily × 2 months | Symptom score, clinical sign score, Improvement Scalec |
Post vs. pre intervention: Acupuncture group overall improvement (p < 0.01) Control group overall improvement (p < 0.01) Acupuncture vs. control: Overall improvement (p < 0.001) Symptom score (p < 0.05) Clinical sign score (p < 0.05) |
| Zuo 201020 | 2-arm RCT |
n = 75 DM China Outpatients |
Acupuncture, methylcobalamin i.v. | Treatment course: daily sessions for 4 weeks | Methylcobalamin i.v. daily for 4 weeks | NCV (MNCV, SNCV), Neurologic Exam Score, Improvement Scaled |
Acupuncture vs. control: Symptom score (p < 0.05) Neurologic Exam Score (p < 0.001) Post vs. pre intervention: Acupuncture group Neurologic Exam Score (p < 0.001) Acupuncture group median, peroneal MNCV and SNCV (p < 0.001) Control group median, peroneal SNCV (p < 0.001) |
| Anastasi 201365 | 2-arm RCT |
n = 50 HIV United States Outpatients |
Acupuncture, moxibustion | Treatment course: 2× per week for 6 weeks (12 total) | Sham acupuncture, placebo moxibustion | GPS, Subjective Peripheral Neuropathy Screen (SPNS) |
Acupuncture vs. control: GPS significantly better in acupuncture at 2-week follow-up (p < 0.05) Post vs. pre intervention: SPNS average score significantly improved in acupuncture at 2-week follow-up (p < 0.05) |
| Shlay 199858 | 8 groups |
n = 250 HIV United States Outpatients |
Acupuncture | Treatment course: 14 weeks: 2× per week for 6 weeks, followed by weekly for 8 weeks (20 total) | Sham acupuncture, amitriptyline, placebo pill | GPS, Global Pain Relief Score,f QOL questionnaire, Neurologic Summary Score |
Acupuncture vs. sham acupuncture: No difference in pain or quality of life at 6 or 14 weeks More patients in the acupuncture group reported moderate or more pain relief (p = 0.03), not significant after adjustment for multiple comparisons Amitriptyline vs. placebo: No difference in pain or quality of life at 6 or 14 weeks |
| Schiflett 2011 (reanalysis of Shlay 1998)57 | 2 × 2 table |
n = 125 HIV United States Outpatients |
Same | Same | Same | Same |
Covariate analysis using baseline pain with repeated measures at weeks 6 and 14: Baseline pain significant (p < 0.001), acupuncture + amitriptyline interaction significant (p < 0.017) ANCOVA with baseline pain as covariate: Acupuncture associated with significant global pain relief at weeks 6 and 14 |
| Penza 201166 | 2-arm RCT Crossover |
n = 16 DM/IPN United States Outpatients |
Electroacupuncture | Treatment course: six sessions every 5–7 days, 12-week break, crossover | Sham electroacupuncture | VAS, BDI, SF-36 QOL, Patient's Global Impression of Change (PGIC) |
Acupuncture vs. control: No significant difference after treatment Post vs. pre intervention: No significant difference compared to baseline in either group Crossover: No significant difference based on order of treatment |
a
Markedly relieved/improved/failed based on exam and symptoms.
b
Remarkable effectiveness/effectiveness/ineffectiveness based on symptom and clinical sign score.
c
Marked/some/none based on symptoms, exam, labs, NCVs.
d
Marked effectiveness/effectiveness/failure based on symptoms.
e
Cured/obviously improved/improved/no improvement based on House–Brackmann Scale and Facial Disability Index.
f
Global Pain Relief Score—complete/a lot/moderate/slight/none/worse.
BCTS, Boston Carpal Tunnel Score; BDI, Beck Depression Inventory; CMAP, Compound Muscle Action Potential; CSI, Combined Sensory Index; CTSAQ, Carpal Tunnel Self-Assessment Questionnaire; DML, distal motor latency, DSL, distal sensory latency; FDI, Facial Disability Index; FDIP, FDI Physical; FDIS, FDI Social; GPS, Gracely Pain Score; GSS, Global Symptom Scale; MNCV, motor nerve conduction velocities; NCS, nerve conduction studies; NCV, nerve conduction velocity; PN, peripheral neuropathy; QOL, quality of life; SNAP, sensory nerve action potential; SF-36 QOL, San Francisco-36 Quality of Life inventory; SNCV, sensory nerve conduction velocities; W-P SNCV, wrist–palmar sensory nerve conduction velocity; VAS, Visual Analog Scale.