Adrian White

Acupuncture and related interventions for smoking cessation.

BACKGROUNDnAcupuncture and related techniques are promoted as a treatment for smoking cessation in the belief that they may reduce nicotine withdrawal symptoms.nnnOBJECTIVESnThe objectives of this review are to determine the effectiveness of acupuncture and the related interventions of acupressure, laser therapy and electrostimulation in smoking cessation, in comparison with no intervention, sham treatment, or other interventions.nnnSEARCH METHODSnWe searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register (which includes trials of smoking cessation interventions identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO) and AMED in October 2013. We also searched four Chinese databases in September 2013: Sino-Med, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data and VIP.nnnSELECTION CRITERIAnRandomized trials comparing a form of acupuncture, acupressure, laser therapy or electrostimulation with either no intervention, sham treatment or another intervention for smoking cessation.nnnDATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSISnWe extracted data in duplicate on the type of smokers recruited, the nature of the intervention and control procedures, the outcome measures, method of randomization, and completeness of follow-up.We assessed abstinence from smoking at the earliest time-point (before six weeks) and at the last measurement point between six months and one year. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence for each trial, and biochemically validated rates if available. Those lost to follow-up were counted as continuing smokers. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis pooling risk ratios using a fixed-effect model.nnnMAIN RESULTSnWe included 38 studies. Based on three studies, acupuncture was not shown to be more effective than a waiting list control for long-term abstinence, with wide confidence intervals and evidence of heterogeneity (n = 393, risk ratio [RR] 1.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.98 to 3.28, I² = 57%). Compared with sham acupuncture, the RR for the short-term effect of acupuncture was 1.22 (95% CI 1.08 to 1.38), and for the long-term effect was 1.10 (95% CI 0.86 to 1.40). The studies were not judged to be free from bias, and there was evidence of funnel plot asymmetry with larger studies showing smaller effects. The heterogeneity between studies was not explained by the technique used. Acupuncture was less effective than nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). There was no evidence that acupuncture is superior to psychological interventions in the short- or long-term. There is limited evidence that acupressure is superior to sham acupressure for short-term outcomes (3 trials, n = 325, RR 2.54, 95% CI 1.27 to 5.08), but no trials reported long-term effects, The pooled estimate for studies testing an intervention that included continuous auricular stimulation suggested a short-term benefit compared to sham stimulation (14 trials, n = 1155, RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.32 to 2.16); subgroup analysis showed an effect for continuous acupressure (7 studies, n = 496, RR 2.73, 95% CI 1.78 to 4.18) but not acupuncture with indwelling needles (6 studies, n = 659, RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.69). At longer follow-up the CIs did not exclude no effect (5 trials, n = 570, RR 1.47, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.74). The evidence from two trials using laser stimulation was inconsistent and could not be combined. The combined evidence on electrostimulation suggests it is not superior to sham electrostimulation (short-term abstinence: 6 trials, n = 634, RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.46; long-term abstinence: 2 trials, n = 405, RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.23).nnnAUTHORS CONCLUSIONSnAlthough pooled estimates suggest possible short-term effects there is no consistent, bias-free evidence that acupuncture, acupressure, or laser therapy have a sustained benefit on smoking cessation for six months or more. However, lack of evidence and methodological problems mean that no firm conclusions can be drawn. Electrostimulation is not effective for smoking cessation. Well-designed research into acupuncture, acupressure and laser stimulation is justified since these are popular interventions and safe when correctly applied, though these interventions alone are likely to be less effective than evidence-based interventions.

Variability of criteria used to diagnose myofascial trigger point pain syndrome- : Evidence from a review of the literature

ObjectivesThe aim of the literature review was to investigate the criteria adopted by “experts” to diagnose myofascial trigger point (MTrP) pain syndrome. Experts were defined as being either researchers investigating MTrP pain syndrome or the “authority” the researchers cited as a source of reference for MTrP pain syndrome diagnosis. MethodsWe searched electronic databases to identify relevant empirical research (excluding studies not in English and those relating to dental pathology). Of 607 possibly relevant publications 93 met our inclusion criteria. We recorded (1) the individual criterion and criteria combinations used to diagnose MTrP pain syndrome; (2) the cited “authoritative” publications and (3) the criteria recommended by the authoritative publications as being essential for MTrP pain syndrome diagnosis. ResultsThe review identified 19 different diagnostic criteria. The 4 most commonly applied criteria were: “tender spot in a taut band” of skeletal muscle, “patient pain recognition,” “predicted pain referral pattern,” and “local twitch response.” There was no consistent pattern to the choice of specific diagnostic criteria or their combinations. However, one pair of criteria “tender point in a taut band” and “predicted or recognized pain referral” were used by over half the studies. The great majority of studies cited publications by Travell and more recently Simons as a principal authoritative source for MTrP pain syndrome diagnosis, yet most of these studies failed to apply the diagnostic criteria as described by these authorities. DiscussionWe conclude that there is as yet limited consensus on case definition in respect of MTrP pain syndrome. Further research is needed to test the reliability and validity of diagnostic criteria. Until reliable diagnostic criteria have been established, there is a need for greater transparency in research papers on how a case of MTrP pain syndrome is defined, and claims for effective interventions in treating the condition should be viewed with caution.

Acupuncture for idiopathic headache.

BACKGROUNDnAcupuncture is widely used for the treatment of headache, but its effectiveness is controversial.nnnOBJECTIVESnTo determine whether acupuncture is: - more effective than no treatment - more effective than sham (placebo) acupuncture - as effective as other interventions used to treat idiopathic (primary) headaches.nnnSEARCH STRATEGYnElectronic searches were performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, and the database of the Cochrane Field for Complementary Medicine. We also contacted researchers in the field and checked the bibliographies of all articles obtained.nnnSELECTION CRITERIAnRandomized or quasi-randomized clinical trials comparing acupuncture with any type of control intervention for the treatment of idiopathic (primary) headaches were included.nnnDATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSISnInformation on patients, interventions, methods, and results was extracted by at least two independent reviewers using a pre-tested standard form. Results on headache frequency and intensity were summarized descriptively. Responder rate ratios (responder rate in treatment group/responder rate in control group) were calculated as a crude indicator of results for sham-acupuncture-controlled trials. Quantitative meta-analysis was not possible due to trial heterogeneity and insufficient reporting.nnnMAIN RESULTSnTwenty-six trials including a total of 1151 patients (median, 37; range, 10-150) met the inclusion criteria. Sixteen trials were conducted among patients with migraine, six among patients with tension-type headache, and four among patients with various types of headaches. The majority of trials had methodological and/or reporting shortcomings. In eight of the 16 trials comparing true and sham (placebo) acupuncture in migraine and tension-type headache patients, true acupuncture was reported to be significantly superior; in four trials there was a trend in favor of true acupuncture; and in two trials there was no difference between the two interventions. (Two trials were uninterpretable.) The 10 trials comparing acupuncture with other forms of treatment yielded contradictory results.nnnREVIEWERS CONCLUSIONSnOverall, the existing evidence supports the value of acupuncture for the treatment of idiopathic headaches. However, the quality and amount of evidence are not fully convincing. There is an urgent need for well-planned, large-scale studies to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of acupuncture under real-life conditions.

The Acupuncture on Hot Flushes Among Menopausal Women (ACUFLASH) study, a randomized controlled trial

Objective: This study compared the effectiveness of individualized acupuncture plus self-care versus self-care alone on hot flashes and health-related quality of life in postmenopausal women. Methods: This study involved a multicenter, pragmatic, randomized, controlled trial with two parallel arms. Participants were postmenopausal women experiencing, on average, seven or more hot flashes per 24 hours during seven consecutive days. The acupuncture group received 10 acupuncture treatment sessions and advice on self-care, and the control group received advice on self-care only. The frequency and severity (0-10 scale) of hot flashes were registered in a diary. Urine excretion of calcitonin gene-related peptide was assessed at baseline and after 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was change in mean hot flash frequency from baseline to 12 weeks. The secondary endpoint was change in health-related quality of life measured by the Womens Health Questionnaire. Results: Hot flash frequency decreased by 5.8 per 24 hours in the acupuncture group (n = 134) and 3.7 per 24 hours in the control group (n = 133), a difference of 2.1 (P < 0.001). Hot flash intensity decreased by 3.2 units in the acupuncture group and 1.8 units in the control group, a difference of 1.4 (P < 0.001). The acupuncture group experienced statistically significant improvements in the vasomotor, sleep, and somatic symptoms dimensions of the Womens Health Questionnaire compared with the control group. Urine calcitonin gene-related peptide excretion remained unchanged from baseline to week 12. Conclusions: Acupuncture plus self-care can contribute to a clinically relevant reduction in hot flashes and increased health-related quality of life in postmenopausal women.

Acupuncture for pelvic and back pain in pregnancy : a systematic review

The objective of our study was to review the effectiveness of needle acupuncture in treating the common and disabling problem of pelvic and back pain in pregnancy. Two small trials on mixed pelvic/back pain and 1 large high-quality trial on pelvic pain met the inclusion criteria. Acupuncture, as an adjunct to standard treatment, was superior to standard treatment alone and physiotherapy in relieving mixed pelvic/back pain. Women with well-defined pelvic pain had greater relief of pain with a combination of acupuncture and standard treatment, compared to standard treatment alone or stabilizing exercises and standard treatment. We used a narrative synthesis due to significant clinical heterogeneity between trials. Few and minor adverse events were reported. We conclude that limited evidence supports acupuncture use in treating pregnancy-related pelvic and back pain. Additional high-quality trials are needed to test the existing promising evidence for this relatively safe and popular complementary therapy.

The safety of acupuncture during pregnancy: a systematic review

Objective Although there is a growing interest in the use of acupuncture during pregnancy, the safety of acupuncture is yet to be rigorously investigated. The objective of this review is to identify adverse events (AEs) associated with acupuncture treatment during pregnancy. Methods We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED) and five Korean databases up to February 2013. Reference lists of relevant articles were screened for additional reports. Studies were included regardless of their design if they reported original data and involved acupuncture needling and/or moxibustion treatment for any conditions in pregnant women. Studies of acupuncture for delivery, abortion, assisted reproduction or postpartum conditions were excluded. AE data were extracted and assessed in terms of severity and causality, and incidence was determined. Results Of 105 included studies, detailed AEs were reported only in 25 studies represented by 27 articles (25.7%). AEs evaluated as certain, probable or possible in the causality assessment were all mild/moderate in severity, with needling pain being the most frequent. Severe AEs or deaths were few and all considered unlikely to have been caused by acupuncture. Total AE incidence was 1.9%, and the incidence of AEs evaluated as certainly, probably or possibly causally related to acupuncture was 1.3%. Conclusions Acupuncture during pregnancy appears to be associated with few AEs when correctly applied.

Acupuncture for the prevention of episodic migraine.

BACKGROUNDnAcupuncture is often used for migraine prevention but its effectiveness is still controversial. We present an update of our Cochrane review from 2009.nnnOBJECTIVESnTo investigate whether acupuncture is a) more effective than no prophylactic treatment/routine care only; b) more effective than sham (placebo) acupuncture; and c) as effective as prophylactic treatment with drugs in reducing headache frequency in adults with episodic migraine.nnnSEARCH METHODSnWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL: 2016, issue 1); MEDLINE (via Ovid, 2008 to January 2016); Ovid EMBASE (2008 to January 2016); and Ovid AMED (1985 to January 2016). We checked PubMed for recent publications to April 2016. We searched the World Health Organization (WHO) Clinical Trials Registry Platform to February 2016 for ongoing and unpublished trials.nnnSELECTION CRITERIAnWe included randomized trials at least eight weeks in duration that compared an acupuncture intervention with a no-acupuncture control (no prophylactic treatment or routine care only), a sham-acupuncture intervention, or prophylactic drug in participants with episodic migraine.nnnDATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSISnTwo reviewers checked eligibility; extracted information on participants, interventions, methods and results, and assessed risk of bias and quality of the acupuncture intervention. The primary outcome was migraine frequency (preferably migraine days, attacks or headache days if migraine days not measured/reported) after treatment and at follow-up. The secondary outcome was response (at least 50% frequency reduction). Safety outcomes were number of participants dropping out due to adverse effects and number of participants reporting at least one adverse effect. We calculated pooled effect size estimates using a fixed-effect model. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created Summary of findings tables.nnnMAIN RESULTSnTwenty-two trials including 4985 participants in total (median 71, range 30 to 1715) met our updated selection criteria. We excluded five previously included trials from this update because they included people who had had migraine for less than 12 months, and included five new trials. Five trials had a no-acupuncture control group (either treatment of attacks only or non-regulated routine care), 15 a sham-acupuncture control group, and five a comparator group receiving prophylactic drug treatment. In comparisons with no-acupuncture control groups and groups receiving prophylactic drug treatment, there was risk of performance and detection bias as blinding was not possible. Overall the quality of the evidence was moderate. Comparison with no acupunctureAcupuncture was associated with a moderate reduction of headache frequency over no acupuncture after treatment (four trials, 2199 participants; standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.56; 95% CI -0.65 to -0.48); findings were statistically heterogeneous (I² = 57%; moderate quality evidence). After treatment headache frequency at least halved in 41% of participants receiving acupuncture and 17% receiving no acupuncture (pooled risk ratio (RR) 2.40; 95% CI 2.08 to 2.76; 4 studies, 2519 participants) with a corresponding number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) of 4 (95% CI 3 to 6); there was no indication of statistical heterogeneity (I² = 7%; moderate quality evidence). The only trial with post-treatment follow-up found a small but significant benefit 12 months after randomisation (RR 2.16; 95% CI 1.35 to 3.45; NNT 7; 95% 4 to 25; 377 participants, low quality evidence). Comparison with sham acupunctureBoth after treatment (12 trials, 1646 participants) and at follow-up (10 trials, 1534 participants), acupuncture was associated with a small but statistically significant frequency reduction over sham (moderate quality evidence). The SMD was -0.18 (95% CI -0.28 to -0.08; I² = 47%) after treatment and -0.19 (95% CI -0.30 to -0.09; I² = 59%) at follow-up. After treatment headache frequency at least halved in 50% of participants receiving true acupuncture and 41% receiving sham acupuncture (pooled RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.36; I² = 48%; 14 trials, 1825 participants) and at follow-up in 53% and 42%, respectively (pooled RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.39; I² = 61%; 11 trials, 1683 participants; moderate quality evidence). The corresponding NNTBs are 11 (95% CI 7.00 to 20.00) and 10 (95% CI 6.00 to 18.00), respectively. The number of participants dropping out due to adverse effects (odds ratio (OR) 2.84; 95% CI 0.43 to 18.71; 7 trials, 931 participants; low quality evidence) and the number of participants reporting adverse effects (OR 1.15; 95% CI 0.85 to 1.56; 4 trials, 1414 participants; moderate quality evidence) did not differ significantly between acupuncture and sham groups. Comparison with prophylactic drug treatmentAcupuncture reduced migraine frequency significantly more than drug prophylaxis after treatment ( SMD -0.25; 95% CI -0.39 to -0.10; 3 trials, 739 participants), but the significance was not maintained at follow-up (SMD -0.13; 95% CI -0.28 to 0.01; 3 trials, 744 participants; moderate quality evidence). After three months headache frequency at least halved in 57% of participants receiving acupuncture and 46% receiving prophylactic drugs (pooled RR 1.24; 95% CI 1.08 to 1.44) and after six months in 59% and 54%, respectively (pooled RR 1.11; 95% CI 0.97 to 1.26; moderate quality evidence). Findings were consistent among trials with I² being 0% in all analyses. Trial participants receiving acupuncture were less likely to drop out due to adverse effects (OR 0.27; 95% CI 0.08 to 0.86; 4 trials, 451 participants) and to report adverse effects (OR 0.25; 95% CI 0.10 to 0.62; 5 trials 931 participants) than participants receiving prophylactic drugs (moderate quality evidence).nnnAUTHORS CONCLUSIONSnThe available evidence suggests that adding acupuncture to symptomatic treatment of attacks reduces the frequency of headaches. Contrary to the previous findings, the updated evidence also suggests that there is an effect over sham, but this effect is small. The available trials also suggest that acupuncture may be at least similarly effective as treatment with prophylactic drugs. Acupuncture can be considered a treatment option for patients willing to undergo this treatment. As for other migraine treatments, long-term studies, more than one year in duration, are lacking.

The effect of TCM acupuncture on hot flushes among menopausal women (ACUFLASH) study: A study protocol of an ongoing multi-centre randomised controlled clinical trial

BackgroundAfter menopause, 10–20% of all women have nearly intolerable hot flushes. Long term use of hormone replacement therapy involves a health risk, and many women seek alternative strategies to relieve climacteric complaints. Acupuncture is one of the most frequently used complementary therapies in Norway. We designed a study to evaluate whether Traditional Chinese Medicine acupuncture-care together with self-care is more effective than self-care alone to relieve climacteric complaints.Methods/DesignThe study is a multi-centre pragmatic randomised controlled trial with two parallel arms. Participants are postmenopausal women who document ≥7 flushes/24 hours and who are not using hormone replacement therapy or other medication that may influence flushes. According to power calculations 200 women are needed to detect a 50% reduction in flushes, and altogether 286 women will be recruited to allow for a 30% dropout rate.The treatment group receives 10 sessions of Traditional Chinese Medicine acupuncture-care and self-care; the control group will engage in self-care only. A team of experienced Traditional Chinese Medicine acupuncturists give acupuncture treatments.DiscussionThe study tests acupuncture as a complete treatment package including the therapeutic relationship and expectation. The intervention period lasts for 12 weeks, with follow up at 6 and 12 months. Primary endpoint is change in daily hot flush frequency in the two groups from baseline to 12 weeks; secondary endpoint is health related quality of life, assessed by the Womens Health Questionnaire. We also collect data on Traditional Chinese Medicine diagnoses, and we examine treatment experiences using a qualitative approach. Finally we measure biological variables, to examine potential mechanisms for the effect of acupuncture. The study is funded by The Research Council of Norway.

Acupuncture for the prevention of tension‐type headache

BACKGROUNDnAcupuncture is often used for prevention of tension-type headache but its effectiveness is still controversial. This is an update of our Cochrane review originally published in Issue 1, 2009 of The Cochrane Library.nnnOBJECTIVESnTo investigate whether acupuncture is a) more effective than no prophylactic treatment/routine care only; b) more effective than sham (placebo) acupuncture; and c) as effective as other interventions in reducing headache frequency in adults with episodic or chronic tension-type headache.nnnSEARCH METHODSnWe searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and AMED to 19 January 2016. We searched the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform to 10 February 2016 for ongoing and unpublished trials.nnnSELECTION CRITERIAnWe included randomised trials with a post-randomisation observation period of at least eight weeks, which compared the clinical effects of an acupuncture intervention with a control (treatment of acute headaches only or routine care), a sham acupuncture intervention or another prophylactic intervention in adults with episodic or chronic tension-type headache.nnnDATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSISnTwo review authors checked eligibility; extracted information on participants, interventions, methods and results; and assessed study risk of bias and the quality of the acupuncture intervention. The main efficacy outcome measure was response (at least 50% reduction of headache frequency) after completion of treatment (three to four months after randomisation). To assess safety/acceptability we extracted the number of participants dropping out due to adverse effects and the number of participants reporting adverse effects. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation).nnnMAIN RESULTSnTwelve trials (11 included in the previous version and one newly identified) with 2349 participants (median 56, range 10 to 1265) met the inclusion criteria.Acupuncture was compared with routine care or treatment of acute headaches only in two large trials (1265 and 207 participants), but they had quite different baseline headache frequency and management in the control groups. Neither trial was blinded but trial quality was otherwise high (low risk of bias). While effect size estimates of the two trials differed considerably, the proportion of participants experiencing at least 50% reduction of headache frequency was much higher in groups receiving acupuncture than in control groups (moderate quality evidence; trial 1: 302/629 (48%) versus 121/636 (19%); risk ratio (RR) 2.5; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.1 to 3.0; trial 2: 60/132 (45%) versus 3/75 (4%); RR 11; 95% CI 3.7 to 35). Long-term effects (beyond four months) were not investigated.Acupuncture was compared with sham acupuncture in seven trials of moderate to high quality (low risk of bias); five large studies provided data for one or more meta-analyses. Among participants receiving acupuncture, 205 of 391 (51%) had at least 50% reduction of headache frequency compared to 133 of 312 (43%) in the sham group after treatment (RR 1.3; 95% CI 1.09 to 1.5; four trials; moderate quality evidence). Results six months after randomisation were similar. Withdrawals were low: 1 of 420 participants receiving acupuncture dropped out due to adverse effects and 0 of 343 receiving sham (six trials; low quality evidence). Three trials reported the number of participants reporting adverse effects: 29 of 174 (17%) with acupuncture versus 12 of 103 with sham (12%; odds ratio (OR) 1.3; 95% CI 0.60 to 2.7; low quality evidence).Acupuncture was compared with physiotherapy, massage or exercise in four trials of low to moderate quality (high risk of bias); study findings were inadequately reported. No trial found a significant superiority of acupuncture and for some outcomes the results slightly favoured the comparison therapy. None of these trials reported the number of participants dropping out due to adverse effects or the number of participants reporting adverse effects.Overall, the quality of the evidence assessed using GRADE was moderate or low, downgraded mainly due to a lack of blinding and variable effect sizes.nnnAUTHORS CONCLUSIONSnThe available results suggest that acupuncture is effective for treating frequent episodic or chronic tension-type headaches, but further trials - particularly comparing acupuncture with other treatment options - are needed.

Myofascial trigger point needling for whiplash associated pain – A feasibility study

Clinicians claim that myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) are a primary cause of pain in whiplash injured patients. Pain from MTrPs is often treated by needling, with or without injection. We conducted a placebo controlled study to test the feasibility of a phase III randomised controlled trial investigating the efficacy of MTrP needling in patients with whiplash associated pain. Forty-one patients referred for physiotherapy with a recent whiplash injury, were recruited. Patients were randomised to receive standardised physiotherapy plus either acupuncture or a sham needle control. A trial was judged feasible if: i) the majority of eligible patients were willing to participate; ii) the majority of patients had MTrPs; iii) at least 75% of patients provided completed self-assessment data; iv) no serious adverse events were reported and v) the end of treatment attrition rate was less than 20%. 70% of those patients eligible to participate volunteered to do so; all participants had clinically identified MTrPs; a 100% completion rate was achieved for recorded self-assessment data; no serious adverse events were reported as a result of either intervention; and the end of treatment attrition rate was 17%. A phase III study is both feasible and clinically relevant. This study is currently being planned.