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

Analysis 5.5.
Comparison 5 acupuncture versus placebo or sham intervention (Chronic LBP: > 3 months),
Outcome 5 improvement in physical examination.
Review:
Acupuncture and dry-needling for low back pain
Comparison:
5 acupuncture versus placebo or sham intervention (Chronic LBP: > 3 months)
Outcome:
5 improvement in physical examination
Study or subgroup Treatment Control Odds Ratio Odds Ratio
n/N n/N M-H,Random,95% CI M-H,Random,95% CI
1 Short-term follow-up (up to 3 months after the end of the sessions)
Edelist 1976 6/15 5/15 1.33 [ 0.30, 5.91 ]
0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10
Favours control
Favours acupuncture
Analysis 5.6.
Comparison 5 acupuncture versus placebo or sham intervention (Chronic LBP: > 3 months),
Outcome 6 Sick leave (higher values mean worse).
Review:
Acupuncture and dry-needling for low back pain
Comparison:
5 acupuncture versus placebo or sham intervention (Chronic LBP: > 3 months)
Outcome:
6 Sick leave (higher values mean worse)
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 Intermediate-term follow-up (3 months to 1 year)
Carlsson 2001 3/21 5/11 38.5 % 0.31 [ 0.09, 1.08 ]
Lehmann 1986 6/13 7/13 61.5 % 0.86 [ 0.40, 1.86 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 34 24 100.0 % 0.58 [ 0.22, 1.54 ]
Total events: 9 (Acupuncture), 12 (placebo / sham)
Heterogeneity: Tau 2 = 0.24; Chi 2 = 1.89, df = 1 (P = 0.17); I 2 =47%
Test for overall effect: Z = 1.09 (P = 0.28)
0.05 0.2 1 5 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.
90