Dataset Information

Manual acupuncture for treatment of diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Manual acupuncture has commonly been used in China, either alone or in combination with conventional medicine, to treat diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN). The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review to evaluate the potential benefits and harms of manual acupuncture for DPN to justify its clinical use.

Methods

We searched for published and unpublished randomized controlled trials of manual acupuncture for DPN till 31 March 2013. Revman 5.2 software was used for data analysis with effect estimate presented as relative risk (RR) and mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI).

Results

A total of 25 trials involving 1649 participants were included. The methodological quality of included trials was generally poor. Meta-analysis showed that manual acupuncture had better effect on global symptom improvement compared with mecobalamin (RR 1.31, 95%CI 1.21 to 1.42), vitamin B1 and B12 (RR 1.55, 95%CI 1.33 to 1.80), and no treatment (RR 1.56, 95%CI 1.31 to 1.85), and that the combination of manual acupuncture and mecobalamin had better effect compared with mecobalamin alone on global symptom improvement (RR 1.56, 95%CI 1.28 to 1.90). Adverse events were not reported in any trials. The asymmetric funnel plot suggested publication bias.

Conclusions

Despite the number of trials of manual acupuncture for DPN and their uniformly positive results, no clinically relevant conclusions can be drawn from this review due to the trials' high risks of bias and the possibility of publication bias. Clearly defined and internationally acknowledged outcome measures are required for future study. There remains an urgent need for training Chinese researchers in conducting unbiased trials as well as prospectively registering all initiated Chinese trials to avoid publication bias.

SUBMITTER: Chen W

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3771980 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTo evaluate the reports' qualities which are about randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of acupuncture treatment on Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy (DPN).Methodology/principal findingsEight databases including The Cochrane Library(1993-Sept.,2011), PubMed (1980-Sept., 2011), EMbase (1980-Sept.,2011), SCI Expanded (1998-Sept.,2011), China Biomedicine Database Disc (CBMdisc, 1978-Sept., 2011), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI, 1979-Sept., 2011 ), VIP (a full text issues database of China, 1989-Sept., 2011), Wan Fang (another full text issues database of China 1998-Sept., 2011) were searched systematically. Hand search for further references was conducted. Language was limited to Chinese and English. We identified 75 RCTs that used acupuncture as an intervention and assessed the quality of these reports with the Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials statement 2010 (CONSORT2010) and Standards for Reporting Interventions Controlled Trials of Acupuncture 2010(STRICTA2010). 24 articles (32%) applied the method of random allocation of sequences. No article gave the description of the mechanism of allocation concealment, no experiment applied the method of blinding. Only one article (1.47%) could be identified directly from its title as about the Randomized Controlled Trials, and only 4 articles gave description of the experimental design. No article mentioned the number of cases lost or eliminated. During one experiment, acupuncture syncope led to temporal interruption of the therapy. Two articles (2.94%) recorded the number of needles, and 8 articles (11.76%) mentioned the depth of needle insertion. None of articles reported the base of calculation of sample size, or has any analysis about the metaphase of an experiment or an explanation of its interruption. One (1.47%) mentioned intentional analysis (ITT).Conclusions/significanceThe quality of the reports on RCTs of acupuncture for Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy is moderate to low. The CONSORT2010 and STRICTA2010 should be used to standardize the reporting of RCTs of acupuncture in future.

Project description:BackgroundDiabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) is a common complication of diabetes mellitus and can lead to serious complications. Therapeutic strategies for pain control are available but there are few approaches that influence neurological deficits such as numbness.AimTo investigate the effectiveness of acupuncture on improving neurological deficits in patients suffering from type 2 DPN.MethodsThe acupuncture in DPN (ACUDPN) study was a two-armed, randomized, controlled, parallel group, open, multicenter clinical trial. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio into two groups: The acupuncture group received 12 acupuncture treatments over 8 wk, and the control group was on a waiting list during the first 16 wk, before it received the same treatment as the other group. Both groups received routine care. Outcome parameters were evaluated after 8, 16 and 24 wk and included neurological scores, such as an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS) 11 for hypesthesia, neuropathic pain symptom inventory (NPSI), neuropathy deficit score (NDS), neuropathy symptom score (NSS); nerve conduction studies (NCS) were assessed with a handheld point-of-care device.ResultsSixty-two participants were included. The NRS for numbness showed a difference of 2.3 (P < 0.001) in favor of the acupuncture group, the effect persisted until week 16 with a difference of 2.2 (P < 0.001) between groups and 1.8 points at week 24 compared to baseline. The NPSI was improved in the acupuncture group by 12.6 points (P < 0.001) at week 8, the NSS score at week 8 with a difference of 1.3 (P < 0.001); the NDS and the TNSc score improved for the acupuncture group in week 8, with a difference of 2.0 points (P < 0.001) compared to the control group. Effects were persistent in week 16 with a difference of 1.8 points (P < 0.05). The NCS showed no meaningful changes. In both groups only minor side effects were reported.ConclusionStudy results suggest that acupuncture may be beneficial in type 2 diabetic DPN and seems to lead to a reduction in neurological deficits. No serious adverse events were recorded and the adherence to treatment was high. Confirmatory randomized sham-controlled clinical studies with adequate patient numbers are needed to confirm the results.

Project description:Background: Acupuncture point (acupoint) injection is a common practice in China. Some trials showed that Chinese herbal extracts and/or conventional medication are injected at the Zusanli (ST36) acupoint for the treatment of diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN). The study aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of acupoint injection for DPN at the ST36 by systematically evaluating the evidence published to date. Methods: Six databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of ST36 injection for DPN with primary outcome of pain, global symptom improvement, and quality of life. Methodological quality was assessed by the Cochrane risk of bias (ROB) tool. Data were analyzed using RevMan 5.3. Results: Fourteen RCTs involving 1,071 participants with DPN were included. All RCTs were assessed as unclear or high ROB. Few RCTs adequately reported methodology-related items and needling details according to Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) and Standards for Reporting Interventions in Controlled Trials of Acupuncture (STRICTA) statement. Medications injected at ST36 included conventional medications (11 RCTs) and Chinese herbal extracts (3 RCTs). The authors of this study did not perform any meta-analysis due to the heterogeneity of medications used for injections. Two individual RCTs favored ST36 injection in relieving pain compared with intramuscular injection of the same medication. For global symptom measured by Toronto clinical scoring system, one RCT showed that ST36 injection of Fufang Danggui was more effective than intramuscular injection of vitamin B12, two RCTs demonstrated that ST36 injection of mecobalamin or Danhong with cointervention was superior, while one RCT showed no significant differences between ST36 injection and intramuscular injection of mecobalamin. For improving nerve conduction velocity (NCV), three of four individual RCTs showed that ST36 injection was better than intramuscular or intravenous injection of the same medication, two RCTs favored ST36 injection with cointervention, and one RCT favored ST36 injection without cointervention. Four RCTs reported monitoring adverse events, all of which showed no significant difference between groups. Conclusions: Limited evidence suggests that ST36 injection appears to be safe, and potentially effective in reducing pain score and improving NCV compared with intramuscular injection of the same medication. However, poor methodological and reporting quality reduced confidence in the findings. Rigorously designed and well-reported RCTs evaluating the effectiveness of ST36 injection for DPN are warranted.