Table 3.
Effect size in SD for trials with follow-up longer than 6 months
Acupuncture and no acupuncture control arms | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Trial | Arm | Week 40 | Week 42 | Week 49 | Week 92 |
Foster 2007[10] | No acupuncture | - | - | 0.60 | |
Foster 2007[10] | Acupuncture | - | - | 0.55 | |
Thomas 2006[30] | No acupuncture | 1.09 | - | - | 1.17 |
Thomas 2006[30] | Acupuncture | 1.30 | - | - | 1.46 |
Cherkin 2001[6] | No acupuncture | - | 0.91 | - | |
Cherkin 2001[6] | Acupuncture | - | 0.85 | - | |
Vickers 2004[37] | No acupuncture | 0.42 | - | - | |
Vickers 2004[37] | Acupuncture | 0.80 | - | - | |
Acupuncture and sham acupuncture arms | |||||
Trial | Arm | Week 23 | Week 25/26 | Week 44 | Week 49 |
Carlsson 2001[5] | Sham | −0.30 | |||
Carlsson 2001[5] | Acupuncture | 0.91 | |||
Foster 2007[10] | Sham | 0.61 | - | - | 0.68 |
Foster 2007[10] | Acupuncture | 0.56 | - | - | 0.57 |
Vas 2006[34] | Sham | - | 1.03 | - | - |
Vas 2006[34] | Acupuncture | - | 1.59 | - | - |
Vas 2008[33] | Sham | 0.33 | - | - | 0.52 |
Vas 2008[33] | Acupuncture | 1.02 | - | - | 1.22 |
Witt 2005[40] | Sham | - | 0.72 | - | |
Witt 2005[40] | Acupuncture | - | 0.78 | - | |
Brinkhaus 2006[4] | Sham | - | 0.69 | - | |
Brinkhaus 2006[4] | Acupuncture | - | 0.76 | - |