Table 2.
Pairwise meta-analysis of pain intensity.
| Comparison | Number | SMD (95% CI) | P | I 2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MA vs SA | 5 | –1.11 [–1.78, –0.43] | .0013 | 86.6% |
| MA vs WM | 5 | 0.01 [–0.39, 0.40] | .9753 | 63.7% |
| MA vs UC | 6 | –0.59 [–1.08, –0.10] | .0176 | 67.0% |
| MA vs NT | 2 | –0.71 [–1.83, 0.40] | .2102 | 68.6% |
| EA vs SA | 1 | –0.09 [–0.53, 0.36] | .7086 | – |
| EA vs UC | 1 | –0.75 [–1.28, –0.23] | .0050 | – |
| EA vs NT | 2 | –1.00 [–2.02, 0.01] | .0525 | 80.8% |
| EA vs MA | 12 | –0.75 [–1.57, 0.07] | .0739 | 95.5% |
| WA vs MA | 4 | –0.96 [–1.24, –0.68] | <.0001 | 49.8% |
| WA vs EA | 3 | –0.61 [–1.22, –0.00] | .0486 | 74.4% |
| FA vs MA | 1 | –1.76 [–2.08, –1.43] | <.0001 | – |
| ACE vs MA | 4 | –0.67 [–1.18, –0.17] | .0091 | 85.5% |
| WM vs UC | 1 | –1.16 [–1.83, –0.48] | .0008 | – |
| SA vs NT | 1 | –0.52 [–1.02, –0.01] | .0439 | – |
ACE = acupoint catgut embedding, CI = confidence interval, EA = electroacupuncture, FA = fire acupuncture, MA = manual acupuncture, NT = no treatment, SA = sham acupuncture, SMD = standardized mean difference, UC = usual care, WA = warm acupuncture, WM = Western medicine.