Table 1.
Clinical trial details: Part A.
| Study design | Type of scar | Type of control | Participants (n) | Type of treatment | Needle location | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cuignet et al. (2015)55 | Cohort | HTS – burn | N/A | 32 | MA + EA | EA on extremity points of shared meridian and inner bladder line of nerve root supplying meridian of the scar. MA to TCM acupoints including some/all of: SP6, 9, 10, ST40, LI4, 11, BL13, 17 |
| Huang et al. (1999)63 | Clinical trial (quasi-experimental) |
HTS – burn | Usual care | 30 (?+30 control) | MA | 3 main TCM points (SP10, ST36 and LI11), unclear whether local needles were also used |
| Kotani et al. (2001)64 | Clinical trial (RCT) |
Abdominal surgery | Sham | 70 | Indwelling | Local tender points along scar |
| Loskotova and Loskotova (2017)66 | Retrospective | Acute burns | Usual care | 1008 total individuals over 32 years; comparison made for 198 with acu and 63 without acu | MA | TCM acupoints bilaterally, with combination of: LI4, LI11 and LU7 depending on access to unburnt skin |
| Song et al. (2011)65 | Clinical trial (RCT) |
HTS –burn | Ultrasound and Scareducer ointment | 80 | MA | Local around scar |
HTS, hypertrophic scar; MA, manual acupuncture; EA, electroacupuncture; TCM, traditional Chinese medicine; VAS, visual analogue scale; QST, quantitative sensory testing; OCSI, Oregon CONSORT STRICTA Instrument; N/A, not available.