Table 5.

Network meta-analysis comparisons of effectiveness for reducing pain intensity.

Fire acupuncture
–0.70 (–2.43, 1.04)	Warm acupuncture
–1.07 (–2.88, 0.74)	–0.37 (–1.42, 0.67)	Acupoint catgut embedding
–1.16 (–2.83, 0.51)	–0.47 (–1.14, 0.20)	–0.09 (–1.02, 0.83)	Electroacupuncture
–1.70 (–3.47, 0.07)	–1.00 (–1.98, –0.02)	–0.63 (–1.72, 0.47)	–0.53 (–1.38, 0.32)	Western medicine
–1.76 (–3.37, –0.14)	–1.06 (–1.71, –0.41)	–0.69 (–1.50, 0.13)	–0.59 (–1.03, –0.15)	–0.06 (–0.79, 0.67)	Manual acupuncture
–2.34 (–4.07, –0.60)	–1.64 (–2.54, –0.74)	–1.27 (–2.31, –0.23)	–1.17 (–1.91, –0.43)	–0.64 (–1.56, 0.28)	–0.58 (–1.22, 0.06)	Usual care
–2.53 (–4.39, –0.66)	–1.83 (–2.93, –0.72)	–1.46 (–2.70, –0.22)	–1.36 (–2.32, –0.41)	–0.83 (–2.02, 0.36)	–0.77 (–1.71, 0.17)	–0.19 (–1.31, 0.94)	No treatment
–2.62 (–4.37, –0.87)	–1.92 (–2.86, –0.99)	–1.55 (–2.62, –0.48)	–1.46 (–2.23, –0.68)	–0.92 (–1.93, 0.08)	–0.86 (–1.55, –0.17)	–0.28 (–1.22, 0.65)	–0.09 (–1.16, 0.98)	Sham acupuncture

Bold and indicate that SMD < 0.00 is statistically significant.