Table 1.
Loop-specific approach.
| Outcomes | Loop | ROR | Z_value | P_value | 95% CI | Loop_Heterog_tau2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Invalid rate | Tui-Tra-Chi | 1.844 | 1.518 | 0.129 | (1.00, 4.06) | 0.207 |
| Tui-Acu-Chi | 1.524 | 0.929 | 0.353 | (1.00, 3.71) | 0.490 | |
| Tui-Acu-Tra | 1.406 | 1.284 | 0.199 | (1.00, 2.37) | 0.240 | |
| Acu-Tra-Chi | 1.242 | 0.585 | 0.558 | (1.00, 2.57) | 0.096 | |
| Cure rate | Tui-Tra-Chi | 1.492 | 1.158 | 0.247 | (1.00, 2.94) | 0.155 |
| Tui-Acu-Chi | 1.425 | 1.893 | 0.058 | (1.00, 2.06) | 0.130 | |
| Tui-Acu-Tra | 1.223 | 0.652 | 0.515 | (1.00, 2.24) | 0.185 | |
| Acu-Tra-Chi | 1.161 | 0.408 | 0.683 | (1.00, 2.38) | 0.259 | |
| VAS | Tui-Acu-Tra | 10.817 | 1.233 | 0.218 | (1.00, 476.46) | 1.305 |
| Acu-Tra-Chi | 23.315 | 0.322 | 0.748 | (1.00, 277137.09) | 2.510 | |
| JOA | Tui-Acu-Tra | 1.629 | 0.368 | 0.713 | (1.00, 21.93) | 1.715 |
Note: loop-specific approach is used to check the inconsistency which aims at the closed loop. In this analysis, ROR is close to 1, indicating no significant difference between direct and indirect effects. VAS=visual analogue score, JOA=Japanese Orthopedic Association Score, Tui=Tuina, Tra=Traction, Acu=Acupuncture, Chi=Chinese herbs.