Skip to main content
. 2016 Aug 26;2016(8):CD004131. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004131.pub3

Gao 2014a.

Methods RCT
 Method of randomisation: random number table
 Blinding: not stated
Adverse effects: not stated
 ITT analysis: not stated
 Losses to FU: none
Participants Country: China
 Number of patients included: 60 (30/30)
 Demographics: 50% male
 Type of stroke: both ischaemic and haemorrhagic strokes
 Diagnosis: CT/MRI
 Severity on entry: not stated
 Time from stroke onset: 3‐6 months
 Setting: outpatient
 Comparability: no significant difference in age or time post onset
Interventions Comparison: acupuncture + WM versus WM
Acupuncture treatment
  • Acupuncture rationale: not stated

  • Needling details

    • Points used: both body and scalp acupoints

    • Numbers of points used: 1 scalp acupoint and 5 body acupoints

    • Depths of insertion: 0.66‐1.05 inches

    • Deqi elicited: not stated

    • Needle stimulation: manual

    • Needle retention time: 30 minutes

    • Needle type: hua tuo brand, length 1.57 inches

  • Treatment regimen

    • Number of treatment sessions: 24 sessions

    • Frequency of treatment: 6 sessions/week

    • Total course: 4 weeks

  • Practitioner background: not stated

  • Co‐intervention: WM


Control interventions: WM
Outcomes
  • Improvement of depression (HAMD)

  • Improvement of neurological function (MESS and SSS)

  • TCM syndrome scoring criteria

Notes
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk Randomisation by using random number table
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Unclear risk Information on the allocation concealment was not reported
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) 
 All outcomes Unclear risk Information on blinding was not reported
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) 
 All outcomes Unclear risk Information on blinding was not reported
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) 
 All outcomes Unclear risk Information on blinding was not reported
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk No participants lost to follow‐up
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Unclear risk Free of selective reporting bias was assessed as 'unclear' due to some clinically important outcomes unstated, such as quality of life, mortality and adverse events
Other bias Unclear risk No information provided