Table 5.
Pairwise meta-analysis of response rate.
| Comparison | Number | RR (95% CI) | I 2 | p | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EA + CM | CM | 1 | 1.08 (0.69, 1.71) | — | — |
| MA + CM | CM | 3 | 1.18 (0.92, 1.52) | 1.7% | 0.362 |
| SA + CM | CM | 3 | 1.20 (0.91, 1.56) | 0% | 0.937 |
| WA + CM | CM | 1 | 1.20 (0.76, 1.88) | — | — |
| FA + CM | CM | 1 | 1.17 (0.81, 1.69) | — | — |
| EA | CM | 2 | 1.09 (0.83, 1.44) | 0% | 0.837 |
| MA | CM | 6 | 1.25 (1.02, 1.54)∗ | 0% | 0.986 |
| SA | CM | 1 | 1.19 (0.74, 1.90) | — | — |
| WA | MA | 2 | 1.29 (0.90, 1.84) | 0% | 0.855 |
| SA + CM | SA | 1 | 1.07 (0.71, 1.60) | — | — |
Notes. ∗ Significant difference, MA: manual acupuncture, EA: electroacupuncture, FA: fire acupuncture, WA: warm acupuncture, SA: scalp acupuncture, and CM: conventional medicine.