Factors Associated with the Magnitude Of acUpuncture treatment effectS (FAMOUS): a meta-epidemiological study of acupuncture randomised controlled trials
Author:
Gang Wei-JuanORCID, Xiu Wen-Cui, Shi Lan-Jun, Zhou Qi, Jiao Rui-Min, Yang Ji-Wei, Shi Xiao-ShuangORCID, Sun Xiao-Yue, Zeng Zhao, Witt Claudia M, Thabane LehanaORCID, Song Ping, Yang Long-Hui, Guyatt Gordon, Zhang Zhi-Yun, Li Heng-Cong, Shi Jing-Tao, Chen An-Li, Qu Zheng-Yang, Zou Ling, Mou Dong-Xiao, Wang Xiao-Yu, Yu Qing-Quan, Chen Li-Zhen, Huang Yu-Ting, Pereira Tiago V, Chambers Jason, Ho Cameron, Bakaa Layla, Loniewski Kevin, Tong Kyle, Tong Jaryd, Dookie Jared E, Zhu Jie-wei, Hu Malini, Suk Yujin, Wu Kay, Lopes Luciane Cruz, White Julia, Buchan Tayler A, Mazzei Lauren Giustti, Alves Maíra Ramos, Moura Mariana Del Grossi, Bergamaschi Cristiane De Cássia, Meng Jing, Chan Cynthia, Sorrilha Flávia Blaseck, Jing Xiang-Hong, Zhang Yu-QingORCID
Abstract
ObjectiveTo identify factors and assess to what extent they impact the magnitude of the treatment effect of acupuncture therapies across therapeutic areas.Data sourceMedline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database, VIP Database, and China Biology Medicine disc, between 2015 and 2019.Study selectionThe inclusion criteria were trials with a total number of randomised patients larger than 100, at least one patient-important outcome and one of two sets of comparisons.Data analysisThe potential independent variables were identified by reviewing relevant literature and consulting with experts. We conducted meta-regression analyses with standardised mean difference (SMD) as effect estimate for the dependent variable. The analyses included univariable meta-regression and multivariable meta-regression using a three-level robust mixed model.Results1304 effect estimates from 584 acupuncture randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were analysed. The multivariable analyses contained 15 independent variables . In the multivariable analysis, the following produced larger treatment effects of large magnitude (>0.4): quality of life (difference of adjusted SMDs 0.51, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.77), or pain (0.48, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.69), or function (0.41, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.61) vs major events. The following produced larger treatment effects of moderate magnitude (0.2–0.4): single-centred vs multicentred RCTs (0.38, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.66); penetration acupuncture vs non-penetration types of acupuncture (0.34, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.53); non-pain symptoms vs major events (0.32, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.52). The following produced larger treatment effects of small magnitude (<0.2): high vs low frequency treatment sessions (0.19, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.35); pain vs non-pain symptoms (0.16, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.27); unreported vs reported funding (0.12, 95% CI 0 to 0.25).ConclusionPatients, clinicians and policy-makers should consider penetrating over non-penetrating acupuncture and more frequent treatment sessions when feasible and acceptable. When designing future acupuncture RCTs, trialists should consider factors that impact acupuncture treatment effects.
Funder
National Natural Science Foundation of China China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences
Cited by
9 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|