Efficacy of Electroacupuncture Compared to Standard and Manual Needling Therapy for Nonspecific Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Nonspecific low back pain is prevalent, and electroacupuncture is one potential treatment option. However, a focused evaluation of previous experimental studies is lacking. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy of electroacupuncture for nonspecific low back pain in co...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Curēus (Palo Alto, CA) CA), 2024-10, Vol.16 (10), p.e72577 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | 10 |
container_start_page | e72577 |
container_title | Curēus (Palo Alto, CA) |
container_volume | 16 |
creator | Hsieh, Daniel Chen, Yueh-Chi Chang, Hui-Chin Wei, Cheng-Chung Lee, Tsung-Hsien |
description | Nonspecific low back pain is prevalent, and electroacupuncture is one potential treatment option. However, a focused evaluation of previous experimental studies is lacking. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy of electroacupuncture for nonspecific low back pain in comparison to standard therapy and manual needling therapy. We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase up to December 1, 2023, for randomized controlled trials on electroacupuncture for nonspecific low back pain. Outcomes measured included the Visual Analog Scale and Numerical Rating Scale. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. 10 reports were included in the meta-analysis. Six studies used electroacpuncture with standard therapy compared to standard therapy alone. Four studies compared electroacupuncture with manual needling therapies. Compared to control groups, electroacupuncture with standard therapy resulted in a statistically significant large effect in reduction in pain (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.83, 95% CI -1.22; -0.43, P < 0.0001) Electroacupuncture did not produce a statistically significant result compared to manual needling therapies (SMD 0, 95% CI -0.71; 0.71, P = 1.0) In terms of long-term analgesic effects, electroacupuncture with standard therapy versus standard therapy yielded a statistically significant large effect in reduction in pain at one month (SMD -0.84, 95% CI -1.30 to -0.37, P = 0.0004) and small effect at two months (SMD -0.40, 95% CI -0.65 to -0.16, P = 0.001) after treatment completion. Limitations, including small numbers of included studies and participants, the difficulty of blinding, and clinical heterogeneity among studies, were found. The certainty of evidence for these comparisons remained very low, which highlights the need for more robust studies. Compared to standard therapy alone, electroacupuncture used with standard therapy produced greater pain reduction for nonspecific low back pain in immediate effects and one month and two months after treatment completion. The findings suggest that electroacpuncture may provide sustained pain relief for nonspecific low back pain when combined with standard therapy. |
doi_str_mv | 10.7759/cureus.72577 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_11604241</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3134454734</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2157-8202a379baa2c2a423e8d673e446565bea1ec594c9d26b7d72f822cae197155a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkU1v1DAQhiMEolXpjTOyxIUDaf0VO-GCltUClZaCaDlbs86kdUnsYCet8j_6gxtIqQqnGel99GhGb5a9ZPRI66I6tmPEMR1pXmj9JNvnTJV5yUr59NG-lx2mdEUpZVRzqunzbE9UilEl1H52u2kaZ8FOJDRk06IdYgA79qO3w-wm69D1ELEmQyBnA_gaYk3mQb6AH6Elp4h16_wFOb_ECP1EmhDJafCpR-tmM9mGG_IB7E_yDZx_R1bkbEoDdjDM2Xe8dniz6HCAfOWhnZJLL7JnDbQJD-_nQfbj4-Z8_Tnffv10sl5tc8tZofOSUw5CVzsAbjlILrCslRYopSpUsUNgaItK2qrmaqdrzZuScwvIKs2KAsRB9n7x9uOuw9qiHyK0po-ugziZAM78m3h3aS7CtWFMUcklmw1v7g0x_BoxDaZzyWLbgscwJiOYkFSVWugZff0fehXGOH-8ULKQWsiZertQNoaUIjYP1zBqfldulsrNn8pn_NXjDx7gvwWLOwdxqbc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3134454734</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Efficacy of Electroacupuncture Compared to Standard and Manual Needling Therapy for Nonspecific Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis</title><source>PubMed Central</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><creator>Hsieh, Daniel ; Chen, Yueh-Chi ; Chang, Hui-Chin ; Wei, Cheng-Chung ; Lee, Tsung-Hsien</creator><creatorcontrib>Hsieh, Daniel ; Chen, Yueh-Chi ; Chang, Hui-Chin ; Wei, Cheng-Chung ; Lee, Tsung-Hsien</creatorcontrib><description>Nonspecific low back pain is prevalent, and electroacupuncture is one potential treatment option. However, a focused evaluation of previous experimental studies is lacking. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy of electroacupuncture for nonspecific low back pain in comparison to standard therapy and manual needling therapy. We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase up to December 1, 2023, for randomized controlled trials on electroacupuncture for nonspecific low back pain. Outcomes measured included the Visual Analog Scale and Numerical Rating Scale. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. 10 reports were included in the meta-analysis. Six studies used electroacpuncture with standard therapy compared to standard therapy alone. Four studies compared electroacupuncture with manual needling therapies. Compared to control groups, electroacupuncture with standard therapy resulted in a statistically significant large effect in reduction in pain (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.83, 95% CI -1.22; -0.43, P < 0.0001) Electroacupuncture did not produce a statistically significant result compared to manual needling therapies (SMD 0, 95% CI -0.71; 0.71, P = 1.0) In terms of long-term analgesic effects, electroacupuncture with standard therapy versus standard therapy yielded a statistically significant large effect in reduction in pain at one month (SMD -0.84, 95% CI -1.30 to -0.37, P = 0.0004) and small effect at two months (SMD -0.40, 95% CI -0.65 to -0.16, P = 0.001) after treatment completion. Limitations, including small numbers of included studies and participants, the difficulty of blinding, and clinical heterogeneity among studies, were found. The certainty of evidence for these comparisons remained very low, which highlights the need for more robust studies. Compared to standard therapy alone, electroacupuncture used with standard therapy produced greater pain reduction for nonspecific low back pain in immediate effects and one month and two months after treatment completion. The findings suggest that electroacpuncture may provide sustained pain relief for nonspecific low back pain when combined with standard therapy.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2168-8184</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2168-8184</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.7759/cureus.72577</identifier><identifier>PMID: 39610636</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Cureus Inc</publisher><subject>Acupuncture ; Anesthesiology ; Back pain ; Bias ; Clinical trials ; Electroacupuncture ; Handbooks ; Integrative/Complementary Medicine ; Intervention ; Meta-analysis ; Pain Management ; Patients ; Physical therapy ; Quality standards ; Socioeconomic factors ; Systematic review</subject><ispartof>Curēus (Palo Alto, CA), 2024-10, Vol.16 (10), p.e72577</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2024, Hsieh et al.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2024, Hsieh et al. This work is published under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2024, Hsieh et al. 2024 Hsieh et al.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2157-8202a379baa2c2a423e8d673e446565bea1ec594c9d26b7d72f822cae197155a3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11604241/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11604241/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,881,27901,27902,53766,53768</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39610636$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hsieh, Daniel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Yueh-Chi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chang, Hui-Chin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wei, Cheng-Chung</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, Tsung-Hsien</creatorcontrib><title>Efficacy of Electroacupuncture Compared to Standard and Manual Needling Therapy for Nonspecific Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis</title><title>Curēus (Palo Alto, CA)</title><addtitle>Cureus</addtitle><description>Nonspecific low back pain is prevalent, and electroacupuncture is one potential treatment option. However, a focused evaluation of previous experimental studies is lacking. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy of electroacupuncture for nonspecific low back pain in comparison to standard therapy and manual needling therapy. We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase up to December 1, 2023, for randomized controlled trials on electroacupuncture for nonspecific low back pain. Outcomes measured included the Visual Analog Scale and Numerical Rating Scale. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. 10 reports were included in the meta-analysis. Six studies used electroacpuncture with standard therapy compared to standard therapy alone. Four studies compared electroacupuncture with manual needling therapies. Compared to control groups, electroacupuncture with standard therapy resulted in a statistically significant large effect in reduction in pain (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.83, 95% CI -1.22; -0.43, P < 0.0001) Electroacupuncture did not produce a statistically significant result compared to manual needling therapies (SMD 0, 95% CI -0.71; 0.71, P = 1.0) In terms of long-term analgesic effects, electroacupuncture with standard therapy versus standard therapy yielded a statistically significant large effect in reduction in pain at one month (SMD -0.84, 95% CI -1.30 to -0.37, P = 0.0004) and small effect at two months (SMD -0.40, 95% CI -0.65 to -0.16, P = 0.001) after treatment completion. Limitations, including small numbers of included studies and participants, the difficulty of blinding, and clinical heterogeneity among studies, were found. The certainty of evidence for these comparisons remained very low, which highlights the need for more robust studies. Compared to standard therapy alone, electroacupuncture used with standard therapy produced greater pain reduction for nonspecific low back pain in immediate effects and one month and two months after treatment completion. The findings suggest that electroacpuncture may provide sustained pain relief for nonspecific low back pain when combined with standard therapy.</description><subject>Acupuncture</subject><subject>Anesthesiology</subject><subject>Back pain</subject><subject>Bias</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Electroacupuncture</subject><subject>Handbooks</subject><subject>Integrative/Complementary Medicine</subject><subject>Intervention</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Pain Management</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Physical therapy</subject><subject>Quality standards</subject><subject>Socioeconomic factors</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><issn>2168-8184</issn><issn>2168-8184</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkU1v1DAQhiMEolXpjTOyxIUDaf0VO-GCltUClZaCaDlbs86kdUnsYCet8j_6gxtIqQqnGel99GhGb5a9ZPRI66I6tmPEMR1pXmj9JNvnTJV5yUr59NG-lx2mdEUpZVRzqunzbE9UilEl1H52u2kaZ8FOJDRk06IdYgA79qO3w-wm69D1ELEmQyBnA_gaYk3mQb6AH6Elp4h16_wFOb_ECP1EmhDJafCpR-tmM9mGG_IB7E_yDZx_R1bkbEoDdjDM2Xe8dniz6HCAfOWhnZJLL7JnDbQJD-_nQfbj4-Z8_Tnffv10sl5tc8tZofOSUw5CVzsAbjlILrCslRYopSpUsUNgaItK2qrmaqdrzZuScwvIKs2KAsRB9n7x9uOuw9qiHyK0po-ugziZAM78m3h3aS7CtWFMUcklmw1v7g0x_BoxDaZzyWLbgscwJiOYkFSVWugZff0fehXGOH-8ULKQWsiZertQNoaUIjYP1zBqfldulsrNn8pn_NXjDx7gvwWLOwdxqbc</recordid><startdate>20241028</startdate><enddate>20241028</enddate><creator>Hsieh, Daniel</creator><creator>Chen, Yueh-Chi</creator><creator>Chang, Hui-Chin</creator><creator>Wei, Cheng-Chung</creator><creator>Lee, Tsung-Hsien</creator><general>Cureus Inc</general><general>Cureus</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20241028</creationdate><title>Efficacy of Electroacupuncture Compared to Standard and Manual Needling Therapy for Nonspecific Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis</title><author>Hsieh, Daniel ; Chen, Yueh-Chi ; Chang, Hui-Chin ; Wei, Cheng-Chung ; Lee, Tsung-Hsien</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2157-8202a379baa2c2a423e8d673e446565bea1ec594c9d26b7d72f822cae197155a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Acupuncture</topic><topic>Anesthesiology</topic><topic>Back pain</topic><topic>Bias</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Electroacupuncture</topic><topic>Handbooks</topic><topic>Integrative/Complementary Medicine</topic><topic>Intervention</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Pain Management</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Physical therapy</topic><topic>Quality standards</topic><topic>Socioeconomic factors</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hsieh, Daniel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Yueh-Chi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chang, Hui-Chin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wei, Cheng-Chung</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, Tsung-Hsien</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Curēus (Palo Alto, CA)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hsieh, Daniel</au><au>Chen, Yueh-Chi</au><au>Chang, Hui-Chin</au><au>Wei, Cheng-Chung</au><au>Lee, Tsung-Hsien</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Efficacy of Electroacupuncture Compared to Standard and Manual Needling Therapy for Nonspecific Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis</atitle><jtitle>Curēus (Palo Alto, CA)</jtitle><addtitle>Cureus</addtitle><date>2024-10-28</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>16</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>e72577</spage><pages>e72577-</pages><issn>2168-8184</issn><eissn>2168-8184</eissn><abstract>Nonspecific low back pain is prevalent, and electroacupuncture is one potential treatment option. However, a focused evaluation of previous experimental studies is lacking. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy of electroacupuncture for nonspecific low back pain in comparison to standard therapy and manual needling therapy. We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase up to December 1, 2023, for randomized controlled trials on electroacupuncture for nonspecific low back pain. Outcomes measured included the Visual Analog Scale and Numerical Rating Scale. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. 10 reports were included in the meta-analysis. Six studies used electroacpuncture with standard therapy compared to standard therapy alone. Four studies compared electroacupuncture with manual needling therapies. Compared to control groups, electroacupuncture with standard therapy resulted in a statistically significant large effect in reduction in pain (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.83, 95% CI -1.22; -0.43, P < 0.0001) Electroacupuncture did not produce a statistically significant result compared to manual needling therapies (SMD 0, 95% CI -0.71; 0.71, P = 1.0) In terms of long-term analgesic effects, electroacupuncture with standard therapy versus standard therapy yielded a statistically significant large effect in reduction in pain at one month (SMD -0.84, 95% CI -1.30 to -0.37, P = 0.0004) and small effect at two months (SMD -0.40, 95% CI -0.65 to -0.16, P = 0.001) after treatment completion. Limitations, including small numbers of included studies and participants, the difficulty of blinding, and clinical heterogeneity among studies, were found. The certainty of evidence for these comparisons remained very low, which highlights the need for more robust studies. Compared to standard therapy alone, electroacupuncture used with standard therapy produced greater pain reduction for nonspecific low back pain in immediate effects and one month and two months after treatment completion. The findings suggest that electroacpuncture may provide sustained pain relief for nonspecific low back pain when combined with standard therapy.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Cureus Inc</pub><pmid>39610636</pmid><doi>10.7759/cureus.72577</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2168-8184 |
ispartof | Curēus (Palo Alto, CA), 2024-10, Vol.16 (10), p.e72577 |
issn | 2168-8184 2168-8184 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_11604241 |
source | PubMed Central; PubMed Central Open Access |
subjects | Acupuncture Anesthesiology Back pain Bias Clinical trials Electroacupuncture Handbooks Integrative/Complementary Medicine Intervention Meta-analysis Pain Management Patients Physical therapy Quality standards Socioeconomic factors Systematic review |
title | Efficacy of Electroacupuncture Compared to Standard and Manual Needling Therapy for Nonspecific Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-09T05%3A18%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Efficacy%20of%20Electroacupuncture%20Compared%20to%20Standard%20and%20Manual%20Needling%20Therapy%20for%20Nonspecific%20Low%20Back%20Pain:%20A%20Systematic%20Review%20and%20Meta-Analysis&rft.jtitle=Cur%C4%93us%20(Palo%20Alto,%20CA)&rft.au=Hsieh,%20Daniel&rft.date=2024-10-28&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=e72577&rft.pages=e72577-&rft.issn=2168-8184&rft.eissn=2168-8184&rft_id=info:doi/10.7759/cureus.72577&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E3134454734%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3134454734&rft_id=info:pmid/39610636&rfr_iscdi=true |