| Methods |
A single‐blind, controlled trial of acupuncture versus standard care. The allocation sequence was computer‐generated and was concealed in opaque envelopes that were numbered consecutively. Participants and the therapist were not blind. |
| Participants |
198 women were enrolled into the trial of acupuncture versus standard care. Women were recruited to the trial who were at term, experiencing regular contractions and had an ability to speak Norwegian. Women were excluded if their labour was induced, planning a caesarean section, a plan to request an epidural block, medical reasons for an epidural, or experiencing any infectious diseases. |
| Interventions |
8 midwives were educated and trained to practice acupuncture for the trial. All women received other analgesics on demand. The acupuncture points used were selected based on the participants' needs and included points BL32, GV20, BL60, BL62, HT7, LR3, GB34, CV4, LI10, LI11, BL23, BL27, 28, 32, LI4, SP6, PC6,7, ST36. De qi was obtained. Needles were left in place for 10‐20 minutes, or removed after the needling sensation was obtained, or taped and left in place. Women in the control group received conventional care. |
| Outcomes |
Clinical outcomes included use of meperidine, use of other analgesics, duration of labour, mode of delivery and Apgar score. Participants also rated their pain relief along a VAS scale and asked to report any side‐effects from the treatment. |
| Notes |
A power analysis was undertaken. There was one drop out in the acupuncture group, and 6 missing records. An intention‐to‐treat analysis was performed. |
| Risk of bias |
| Bias |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
| Allocation concealment? |
Low risk |
A ‐ Adequate |
