Table 1.
Characteristics of included studies.
| Study ID | Age range (week) | Country | Maternal history (%) | Acupuncture group (n) | Control group (n) | Main outcomes | Risk of bias assessment | Conclusion ∗ | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ||||||||
| Landgren 2010 [19] | 2-8 | Sweden | (i) Acupuncture group: food intolerance/allergy (37%), had infantile colic (45%) (ii) Control group: food intolerance/allergy (63%), had infantile colic (58%) |
Standardized manual acupuncture (46) | No treatment (40) | (i)Duration of fussing, crying and colicky crying (ii) Adverse events |
L | L | L | L | L | L | “Standardised, light stimulation of the acupuncture point LI4 twice a week for 3 weeks reduced the duration and intensity of crying more quickly in the acupuncture group than in the control group.” |
| Landgren 2016 [20] | 2-8 | Sweden | Not reported | A: Standardized manual acupuncture (49) + usual care with nurse consultation B: Semi-standardized acupuncture (49) ) + usual care with nurse consultation |
Usual care with nurse consultation (49) | (i) Total crying time (ii) Number of colic infants (iii) Adverse events |
L | L | L | L | L | L | “Minimal acupuncture shortened the duration and reduced the intensity of crying in infants with colic.” |
| Reinthal 2008 [13] | 1-25 | Sweden | Not reported | Standardized manual acupuncture + simethicone solution (20) | Simethicone solution (20) |
(i) Crying per day (ii) Modified Behavioral Pain Scale(MBPS) |
U | U | U | U | L | L | “Four treatments with light needing on one point in the hand may alleviate crying and pain related behavior without any noted side effects.” |
| Skjeie 2013 [21] | 3-13 | Norway | Not reported | Standardized manual acupuncture (44) | No treatment (40) | (i) Minutes of crying per day (ii) General assessment of the child's condition (iii) Adverse effects. |
L | L | L | L | L | L | “This trial of acupuncture treatment for infantile colic showed no statistically significant or clinically relevant effect.” |
1: sequence generation; 2: allocation concealment; 3: blinding of participants; 4: blinding of outcome assessor; 5: selective reporting; 6: incomplete outcome; low risk of bias: L; high risk of bias: H; unclear risk of bias: U. ∗Conclusion was extracted from the published article.