Acupuncture and dry-needling for low back pain (Review)

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Analysis 5.2. Comparison 5 acupuncture versus placebo or sham intervention (Chronic LBP: > 3 months), Outcome 2 global improvement (higher values are better). Review: Acupuncture and dry-needling for low back pain Comparison: 5 acupuncture versus placebo or sham intervention (Chronic LBP: > 3 months) Outcome: 2 global improvement (higher values are better) Study or subgroup Acupuncture placebo / sham Risk Ratio Weight Risk Ratio n/N n/N M-H,Random,95% CI M-H,Random,95% CI 1 Immediately after the end of the sessions Lopacz 1979 13/18 9/16 11.2 % 1.28 [ 0.76, 2.16 ] Mendelson 1983 21/36 21/41 18.2 % 1.14 [ 0.76, 1.71 ] Molsberger 2002 52/62 41/61 70.6 % 1.25 [ 1.02, 1.53 ] Subtotal (95% CI) 116 118 100.0 % 1.23 [ 1.04, 1.46 ] Total events: 86 (Acupuncture), 71 (placebo / sham) Heterogeneity: Tau 2 = 0.0; Chi 2 = 0.19, df = 2 (P = 0.91); I 2 =0.0% Test for overall effect: Z = 2.35 (P = 0.019) 2 Short-term follow-up (up to 3 months after the end of the sessions) Carlsson 2001 16/34 2/16 9.8 % 3.76 [ 0.98, 14.44 ] Edelist 1976 7/15 6/15 22.7 % 1.17 [ 0.51, 2.66 ] Molsberger 2002 36/49 23/42 67.5 % 1.34 [ 0.97, 1.85 ] Subtotal (95% CI) 98 73 100.0 % 1.44 [ 0.92, 2.24 ] Total events: 59 (Acupuncture), 31 (placebo / sham) Heterogeneity: Tau 2 = 0.05; Chi 2 = 2.65, df = 2 (P = 0.27); I 2 =25% Test for overall effect: Z = 1.61 (P = 0.11) 3 Intermediate-term follow-up (3 months to 1 year) Kerr 2003 21/23 13/17 100.0 % 1.19 [ 0.89, 1.60 ] Subtotal (95% CI) 23 17 100.0 % 1.19 [ 0.89, 1.60 ] Total events: 21 (Acupuncture), 13 (placebo / sham) Heterogeneity: not applicable Test for overall effect: Z = 1.19 (P = 0.23) 4 Long-term follow-up (more than 1 year) Carlsson 2001 14/34 2/16 100.0 % 3.29 [ 0.85, 12.80 ] Subtotal (95% CI) 34 16 100.0 % 3.29 [ 0.85, 12.80 ] Total events: 14 (Acupuncture), 2 (placebo / sham) Heterogeneity: not applicable Test for overall effect: Z = 1.72 (P = 0.085) 0.05 0.2 1 5 20 favours control favours acupuncture Acupuncture and dry-needling for low back pain (Review) Copyright © 2011 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 88
Analysis 5.3. Comparison 5 acupuncture versus placebo or sham intervention (Chronic LBP: > 3 months), Outcome 3 pain disability index (lower values are better). Review: Acupuncture and dry-needling for low back pain Comparison: 5 acupuncture versus placebo or sham intervention (Chronic LBP: > 3 months) Outcome: 3 pain disability index (lower values are better) Study or subgroup Acupuncture placebo / sham Mean Difference Mean Difference N Mean(SD) N Mean(SD) IV,Random,95% CI IV,Random,95% CI 1 Immediately after the end of the sessions Leibing 2002 35 11.3 (15) 40 15.8 (10.5) -4.50 [ -10.44, 1.44 ] 2 Intermediate-term follow-up (3 months to 1 year) Leibing 2002 33 16.2 (12.5) 31 17 (11.3) -0.80 [ -6.63, 5.03 ] -10 -5 0 5 10 favours acupuncture favours control Analysis 5.4. Comparison 5 acupuncture versus placebo or sham intervention (Chronic LBP: > 3 months), Outcome 4 physical examination (fingertips-to-floor distance).( Lower values are better). Review: Acupuncture and dry-needling for low back pain Comparison: 5 acupuncture versus placebo or sham intervention (Chronic LBP: > 3 months) Outcome: 4 physical examination (fingertips-to-floor distance).( Lower values are better) Study or subgroup Acupuncture placebo / sham Mean Difference Mean Difference N Mean(SD) N Mean(SD) IV,Fixed,95% CI IV,Fixed,95% CI 1 Immediately after the end of the sessions Kerr 2003 26 23.6 (20) 20 28.4 (24.2) -4.80 [ -17.90, 8.30 ] -20 -10 0 10 20 favours acupuncture favours control Acupuncture and dry-needling for low back pain (Review) Copyright © 2011 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 89
Page 1 and 2:
Acupuncture and dry-needling for lo
Page 3 and 4:
Analysis 5.2. Comparison 5 acupunct
Page 5 and 6:
[Intervention Review] Acupuncture a
Page 7 and 8:
traditional meridian acupuncture po
Page 9 and 10:
of experts in acupuncture treatment
Page 11 and 12:
ack pain. The average improvement i
Page 13 and 14:
Figure 2. Acupuncture compared to a
Page 15 and 16:
245 patients who received acupunctu
Page 17 and 18:
Although the conclusions showed som
Page 19 and 20:
R E F E R E N C E S References to s
Page 21 and 22:
Wu 1991 {published data only} Wu YC
Page 23 and 24:
treatments by traditional acupunctu
Page 25 and 26:
Araki 2001 (Continued) Conclusion:
Page 27 and 28:
Ceccherelli 2002 Methods Participan
Page 29 and 30:
Cherkin 2001 (Continued) or acupunc
Page 31 and 32:
Ding 1998 Methods Participants Inte
Page 33 and 34:
Garvey 1989 Methods Participants In
Page 35 and 36:
Giles 1999 Methods Participants Int
Page 37 and 38:
Giles 2003 Methods Participants Int
Page 39 and 40:
Grant 1999 Methods Participants Int
Page 41 and 42: Gunn 1980 (Continued) varied) Costs
Page 43 and 44: Inoue 2000 (Continued) Notes Langua
Page 45 and 46: Kerr 2003 (Continued) For results,
Page 47 and 48: Kurosu 1979(b) Methods Participants
Page 49 and 50: Lehmann 1986 (Continued) Conclusion
Page 51 and 52: Li 1997 (Continued) Interventions O
Page 53 and 54: MacDonald 1983 (Continued) Language
Page 55 and 56: Meng 2003 (Continued) 12.7 Conclusi
Page 57 and 58: Sakai 1998 (Continued) 2) Oral medi
Page 59 and 60: Takeda 2001 (Continued) Mean age: 2
Page 61 and 62: Tsukayama 2002 Methods Participants
Page 63 and 64: Wang 1996 Methods Participants Inte
Page 65 and 66: Yeung 2003 Methods Participants Int
Page 67 and 68: (Continued) Kinoshita 1981 Koike 19
Page 69 and 70: GerAc (Continued) Interventions Out
Page 71 and 72: Munglani (Continued) Contact inform
Page 73 and 74: D A T A A N D A N A L Y S E S Compa
Page 75 and 76: 3.1 Short-term follow-up (up to 3 m
Page 77 and 78: 13.1 Immediately after the end of t
Page 79 and 80: 3.2 Short-term follow-up (up to 3 m
Page 81 and 82: 5 physical examination 1 Mean Diffe
Page 83 and 84: Analysis 1.2. Comparison 1 acupunct
Page 91: Analysis 5.1. Comparison 5 acupunct
Page 97 and 98: Analysis 5.10. sick leave Compariso
Page 99 and 100: Analysis 5.14. Comparison 5 acupunc
Page 103 and 104: pain and function (adjusted for bas
Page 105 and 106: Review: Analysis 7.2. Comparison 7
Page 109 and 110: Analysis 10.3. Comparison 10 acupun
Page 113 and 114: improvement (Continued) Li 1997 Imp
Page 121 and 122: Table 2. Methodological quality ass
Page 123 and 124: Table 2. Methodological quality ass
Page 125 and 126: Table 3. Clinical relevance assessm
Page 127 and 128: Table 4. Improvement in pain Compar
Page 129 and 130: Table 5. Adequacy of acupuncture (C
Page 131 and 132: Table 5. Adequacy of acupuncture (C
Page 133 and 134: 20 factorial$.ti,ab. (2463) 21 foll
Page 135 and 136: (Continued) 30 October 2004 New cit
show all

Acupuncture and dry-needling for low back pain (Review)

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?