Table 4. Characteristics and results of included group comparisons (N = 26 group comparisons).
| Author & year | n | Dropoutsa [reasons] | Type of sham | Blinding index (95% CI) Blinding scenario (AG/SG) | Reported blinding results | Reported blinding conclusion | Between-group SMD (pain) and reported p-values [−ve values in favour of AG] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cotchett, Munteanu & Landorf (2014) | 84 | 5 AG: 3 [1 missed Ax; 2 ceased Ix] SG: 2 [1 missed Ax; 1 ceased Ix] |
NP: Custom (blunt needle) | Insufficient data | NSD between groups (CEQ) (p > 0.05 for all questions) | Success | ST: −0.05 (p = 0.026) LT: −0.42 (p = 0.007) |
| Huguenin et al. (2005) | 52 | 7 [difficulty attending] | NP: Custom (blunt needle) | Insufficient data | AG only: • Immed: Correct (p = 0.001) • ST: NSD between correct and incorrect guesses (p = 0.062) |
Success | Immed/B: d(NSD) ST: d(NSD) |
| Inoue et al. (2006) | 31 | 0 | NP: Custom (guide tube only) | AG: 0.20 (−0.30–0.70) SG: 0.25 (−0.22–0.72) Correct/Correct |
NSD between groups (p NR) AG: 9/15 correct SG: 10/16 correct |
Success | Immed/B: 0.76 (p = 0.020) |
| bItoh & Katsumi (2005) (NP) | 19 | 3 AG: 1 SG: 2 [All groups: 5 DNR; 2 AE] |
NP: Custom (guide tube only) |
cAG: 0.60 (0.10–1.10) cSG: −0.11 (−0.76–0.54) Correct/Random |
NSD between groups (p = 0.64) AG: 8/10 correct SG: 4/9 correct |
Success | ST: −0.82 (p <0.05) B: −2.35 (p <0.01) LT: −0.98 (NSD) |
| bItoh & Katsumi (2005) (P) | 19 | 3 AG: 1 SG: 2 [All groups: 5 DNR; 2 AE] |
P: TrP SDN |
cAG: 0.60 (0.10–1.10) cSG: −0.20 (−0.81–0.41) Correct/Incorrect |
NSD between groups (p = 0.64) AG: 8/10 correct SG: 4/10 correct |
Success | ST: −0.77 (NSD) B: −0.67 (p <0.05) LT: −0.13 (NSD) |
| Sterling et al. (2015) | 80 | 7 AG: 3 [LTFU] SG: 4 [LTFU] |
NP: Commercial (Park sham) | Insufficient data | Descriptive only SG: 1/36 correct [All remaining participants believed AG or DK] |
Success | LT: −0.04 (NSD) B: −0.09 (NSD) |
| Dıraçoğlu et al. (2012) | 50 | 2 AG: 1 [difficulty attending] SG: 1 [DNR] |
P: Non-TrP SDN | Did not assess blinding | – | – | ST: 0.06 (p = 0.478) |
| Espejo Antúnez et al. (2014) | 45 | 0 | NP: Custom (retracting needle) | Did not assess blinding | – | – | Immed: −1.15 (p <0.01) |
| García-Gallego et al. (2011) | 33 | 0 | P: Non-TrP DN | Did not assess blinding | – | – | Immed: 0.09 (NSD) ST: 0.17 (NSD) |
| Itoh, Katsumi & Kitakoji (2004) | 18 | 4 AG: 1 [AE] SG: 3 [DNR] |
P: TrP SDN | Did not assess blinding | – | – | ST: −0.72 (NSD) LT: −0.21 (NSD) |
| Itoh et al. (2006a) | 19 | 7 AG: 3 [2 DNR; 1 AE] SG: 4 [DNR] |
NP: Custom (blunt needle) | AG: 0.50 (0.00–1.00) SG: −0.11 (−0.68–0.46) Correct/Random |
NSD between groups (p = 0.38) AG: 7/10 correct; 1/10 DK SG: 3/9 correct; 2/9 DK |
Success | ST: −1.38 (NSD) B: −3.43 (p <0.001) LT: −1.19 (NSD) |
| Itoh et al. (2006b) | 18 | 5 AG: 2 SG: 3 [All groups: 4 DNR; 2 drugs] |
NP: Custom (blunt needle) | AG: NR SG: −0.56 (−1.00–−0.11) NR/Incorrect |
Descriptive only (SG only) SG: 1/9 correct; 2/9 DK |
NR | ST/B: −1.11 (p <0.05) LT: −0.35 (NSD) |
| bItoh et al. (2007) (NP) | 15 | 5 AG: 2 [1 DNR; 1 AE] SG: 3 [2 DNR; 1 AE) |
NP: Custom (blunt needle) | AG: 0.38 (−0.11–0.86) SG: −0.29 (−0.94–0.37) Correct/Incorrect |
NSD between groups (p = 0.89) AG: 4/8 correct; 3/8 DK SG: 2/7 correct; 1/7 DK |
Success | ST: −0.71 (NSD) B: −1.87 (NSD) LT: −2.52 (NSD) |
| bItoh et al. (2007) (P) | 16 | 4 AG: 2 [1 DNR; 1 AE] SG: 2 [1 DNR; 1 AE] |
P: Non-TrP DN | AG: 0.38 (−0.11–0.86) SG: −0.38 (−0.86–0.11) Correct/Incorrect |
NSD between groups (p = 0.89) AG: 4/8 correct; 3/8 DK SG: 1/8 correct; 3/8 DK |
Success | ST: −1.32 (NSD) B: −2.25 (NSD) LT: −3.25 (NSD) |
| Itoh et al. (2008) | 15 | 5 AG: 2 [1 DNR; 1 AE] SG: 3 [DNR] |
NP: Custom (blunt needle) | AG: 0.75 (0.29–1.21) SG: −0.43 (−1.10–0.24) Correct/Incorrect |
NSD between groups (p = 0.74) AG: 7/8 correct SG: 2/7 correct |
Success | ST: −1.95 B: −2.67 LT: −0.81 (AUC p = 0.025) |
| Itoh et al. (2012) | 15 | 1 AG: 1 [AE] |
NP: Custom (blunt needle) | AG: 1.00 (1.00–1.00) SG: −1.00 (−1.00–−1.00) Correct/Incorrect |
Descriptive only [All participants believed they were in AG] |
Success | ST: −0.46 B: −1.83 LT: −1.65 (AUC p = 0.003) |
| Itoh et al. (2014) | 15 | 1 SG: 1 [DNR] |
NP: Custom (blunt needle) | AG: 0.56 (0.01–1.10) SG: −0.50 (−1.10–0.10) Correct/Incorrect |
NSD between groups (p = 0.89) AG: 7/9 correct SG: 2/8 correct |
Success | ST: −0.96 B: −1.29 LT: −1.44 (AUC p = 0.024) |
| Katsumi et al. (2004) | 9 | 0 | NP: Custom (guide tube only) | AG: 1.00 (1.00–1.00) SG: −0.60 (−1.30–0.10) Correct/Incorrect |
Descriptive only AG: 4/4 correct SG: 1/5 correct |
NR | ST: −0.64 (NR) B: −4.36 (NR) LT: −0.73 (NR) |
| Mayoral et al. (2013) | 31 | 9 AG: 4 [LTFU] SG: 5 [LTFU] |
No needle: GA/SA | Did not assess blinding | – | – | ST: −0.34 (p = 0.294) LT: −0.23 (p = 0.516) |
| McMillan, Nolan & Kelly (1997) | 20 | NR | P: Non-TrP SDN | Did not assess blinding | – | – | Immed: 0.35 (NSD) ST: 0.26 (NSD) |
| Myburgh et al. (2012) | 77 | 4 AG: 4 [2 non-compliant; 1 AE; 1 NR] |
P: TrP SDN | Did not assess blinding | – | – | ST: −0.37 (NSD) |
| Nabeta & Kawakita (2002) | 34 | 7 AG: 2 [difficulty attending] SG: 5 [difficulty attending] |
NP: Custom (blunt needle) | AG: 0.41 (0.01–0.81) SG: −0.18 (−0.62–0.26) Correct/Random |
NSD between groups (p = 0.74) AG: 11/17 correct; 2/17 DK SG: 6/17 correct; 2/17 DK |
Success | Immed: −0.12 (NSD) ST: −0.31 (NSD) B: −0.25 (NSD) |
| Pecos-Martín et al. (2015) | 72 | 0 | P: Non-TrP DN | Did not assess blinding | – | – | ST: −1.59 (p <0.001) LT: −1.93 (p <0.001) |
| Tekin et al. (2013) | 39 | 7 AG: 1 [ceased Ix] SG: 6 [ceased Ix] |
NP: Custom (blunt needle) | Did not assess blinding | – | – | Immed: −0.88 (p = 0.034) ST: −1.62 (p = 0.000) |
| Tough et al. (2009)/Tough et al. (2010) | 41 | 7 AG: 3 [LTFU] SG: 4 [LTFU] |
NP: Custom (blunt needle) | AG: 0.53 (0.30–0.75) SG: −0.67 (−0.93–−0.40) Correct/Incorrect |
NSD between groups (p>0.2) AG: 10/19 correct; 9/19 DK SG: 1/18 correct; 4/18 DK |
Success | ST/B: 0.11 (NR) LT: −0.61 (p = 0.67) |
| Tsai et al. (2010) | 35 | 0 | P: TrP SDN | Did not assess blinding | – | – | Immed: −0.91 (p <0.05) |
Notes.
a
Dropouts for pain outcome.
b
Itoh & Katsumi (2005) and Itoh et al. (2007) each had two eligible sham groups; in both of these trials one group had a non-penetrating (NP) sham and the other had a penetrating (P) sham (labelled accordingly in the first column of the table).
c
Itoh & Katsumi (2005) only reported the number of participants from each group who guessed they were in the active group, therefore, to calculate the BI it was conservatively assumed that the remaining participants guessed they were in the sham group (i.e., no DK responses).
d
Data not reported as mean/SD (could not calculate SMD).
- n
- number of participants (analysed for pain outcome)]
- 95% CI
- 95% Confidence Interval
- AG
- Active Group
- SG
- Sham Group
- SMD
- Standardised Mean Difference
- −ve
- Negative
- Ax
- Assessment
- Ix
- Intervention
- NP
- Non Penetrating
- NSD
- No Significant Difference
- CEQ
- Credibility/Expectancy Questionnaire
- ST
- Short-Term (24 hours to four weeks, closest assessment to one week)
- LT
- Long-Term (one to six months, closest assessment to three months)
- Immed
- Immediately post-intervention (<24 hours after first/only intervention)
- B
- time-point at which Blinding was assessed
- NR
- Not Reported
- DNR
- Did Not Respond (to intervention)
- AE
- Adverse Effects
- P
- Penetrating
- TrP SDN
- Superficial Dry Needling above Trigger Point
- LTFU
- Loss To Follow Up
- DK
- Don’t Know
- Non-TrP SDN
- Superficial Dry Needling away from Trigger Point
- Non-TrP DN
- Dry Needling away from Trigger Point
- AUC
- Area Under Curve
- GA
- General Anaesthesia
- SA
- Spinal Anaesthesia
Shading represents adequately blinded trials (based on critical appraisal criteria for review question 2).