Electroacupuncture versus manual acupuncture for knee osteoarthritis: a randomized controlled pilot trial

Author:

Wang Tian-Qi1,Li Yong-Ting1,Wang Li-Qiong1,Shi Guang-Xia1,Tu Jian-Feng2ORCID,Yang Jing-Wen1,Hou Ya-Quan1,Lin Lu-Lu1,Sun Ning3,Zhao Jing-Jie4,Hou Hai-Kun5,Liu Cun-Zhi1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Acupuncture Research Center, School of Acupuncture, Moxibustion and Tuina, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China

2. Department of Acupuncture and Moxibustion, Beijing Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China

3. Acupuncture and Tuina School, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, China

4. Department of Acupuncture and Moxibustion, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China

5. Department of Acupuncture and Moxibustion, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital, The Fourth Medical College of Peking University, Beijing, China

Abstract

Objective: We aimed to explore the feasibility of evaluating the comparative effectiveness and safety of electroacupuncture (EA) relative to manual acupuncture (MA) for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KOA). Methods: A multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted in Beijing from September 2017 to January 2018. A total of 60 participants with KOA were randomly allocated to either EA ( n = 30) or MA ( n = 30) groups. Participants in the EA group were treated with EA at six to seven local traditional acupuncture points or ah shi points, and two to three distal points. Participants in the MA group had the same schedule as the EA group except that the electrical apparatus featured a working power indicator without actual current output, constituting a sham EA procedure, in order to blind participants. Both groups received 24 sessions over 8 weeks. The primary outcome was response rate, defined as a change of ⩾50% from baseline in the total scores of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) after 8 weeks. Secondary outcomes included pain, stiffness, function, quality of life, and acupuncture-related adverse events (AEs) at 4 and 8 weeks. Results: Of 60 participants randomized, 53 (88%) completed the study. Response rates were 43% for the EA group and 30% for the MA group by the intention-to-treat analysis. Although significant differences were observed in WOMAC pain, stiffness, and function scores within both groups, between-group differences at 8 weeks did not reach statistical significance (odds ratio = 1.75 (95% confidence interval = 0.593–5.162)). Rates of AEs were low and similarly distributed between groups. Conclusion: Both EA and MA interventions in KOA were feasible and appeared safe. Whether or not EA may have a stronger impact on pain and function requires further evaluation through larger, adequately powered, randomized controlled trials. Trial registration number: NCT03274713.

Funder

Beijing Municipal Science & Technology Commission

beijing municipal administration of hospitals clinical medicine development of special funding support

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Clinical Neurology,Complementary and alternative medicine,General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3