Dataset Information

The Use of Wet Cupping for Persistent Nonspecific Low Back Pain: Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of wet cupping therapy as a single treatment for persistent nonspecific low back pain (PNSLBP).

Design

Randomized controlled trial comparing wet cupping versus no treatment in PNSLBP.

Setting

Outpatient clinic in three secondary care hospitals in Saudi Arabia.

Patients

Eighty eligible participants with PNSLBP for at least 3 months were randomly allocated to an intervention group (n=40) or to a control group (n=40).

Interventions

Six wet cupping sessions within 2 weeks, each of which were done at two bladder meridian (BL) acupuncture points among BL23, BL24, and BL25. Only acetaminophen was allowed as a rescue treatment in both groups.

Outcome measures

The Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), McGill Present Pain Intensity (PPI), and Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODQ) were used as outcome measures. Numbers of acetaminophen tablets taken were compared at 4 weeks from baseline. Adverse events were recorded.

Results

At the end of the intervention, statistically significant differences in the three outcome measures favoring the wet cupping group compared with the control group were seen: NRS score, 29.2 (95% confidence interval [CI], 24.6-33.8) versus 57.9 (95% CI, 53.3-62.6), respectively; PPI score, 1.17 (95% CI, 0.96-1.4) versus 2.3 (95% CI, 2.1- 2.7); and ODQ score, 19.6 (95% CI, 16.5-22.7) versus 35.4 (95% CI, 32.3-38.5) (p=0.0001). This improvement continued for another 2 weeks after the end of the intervention. Acetaminophen was used less in the wet cupping group, but this difference was not statistically significant. No adverse events were reported.

Conclusions

Wet cupping is potentially effective in reducing pain and improving disability associated with PNSLBP at least for 2 weeks after the end of the wet cupping period. Placebo-controlled trials are needed.

SUBMITTER: AlBedah A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4522952 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The Use of Wet Cupping for Persistent Nonspecific Low Back Pain: Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.

AlBedah Abdullah A Khalil Mohamed M Elolemy Ahmed A Hussein Asim A AA AlQaed Meshari M Al Mudaiheem Abdullah A Abutalib Raid A RA Bazaid Faisal Mohamed FM Bafail Ahmad Saeed AS Essa AboBakr A Bakrain Mohammed Yahia MY

Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.) 20150612 8

<h4>Objectives</h4>To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of wet cupping therapy as a single treatment for persistent nonspecific low back pain (PNSLBP).<h4>Design</h4>Randomized controlled trial comparing wet cupping versus no treatment in PNSLBP.<h4>Setting</h4>Outpatient clinic in three secondary care hospitals in Saudi Arabia.<h4>Patients</h4>Eighty eligible participants with PNSLBP for at least 3 months were randomly allocated to an intervention group (n=40) or to a control group (n=40).< ...[more]

PMID: 26069973

Similar Datasets

Project description:Persistent non-specific low back pain (PNSLBP) is one of the most frequently experienced types of back pain around the world. Wet-cupping is a common intervention for various pain conditions, especially in Korea. In this context, we conducted a pilot study to determine the effectiveness and safety of wet-cupping treatment for PNSLBP.We recruited 32 participants (21 in the wet-cupping group and 11 in the waiting-list group) who had been having PNSLBP for at least 3 months. The participants were recruited at the clinical research centre of the Korea Institute of Oriental Medicine, Korea. Eligible participants were randomly allocated to wet-cupping and waiting-list groups. Following the practice of traditional Korean medicine, the treatment group was provided with wet-cupping treatment at two acupuncture points among the BL23, BL24 and BL25 6 times within 2 weeks. Usual care, including providing brochures for exercise, general advice for PNSLBP and acetaminophen, was allowed in both groups. Separate assessors participated in the outcome assessment. We used the 0 to 100 numerical rating scale (NRS) for pain, the McGill Pain Questionnaire for pain intensity (PPI) and the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODQ), and we assessed acetaminophen use and safety issues.The results showed that the NRS score for pain decreased (-16.0 [95% CI: -24.4 to -7.7] in the wet-cupping group and -9.1 [-18.1 to -0.1] in the waiting-list group), but there was no statistical difference between the groups (p = 0.52). However, the PPI scores showed significant differences between the two groups (-1.2 [-1.6 to -0.8] for the wet-cupping group and -0.2 [-0.8 to 0.4] for the waiting-list group, p < 0.01). In addition, less acetaminophen was used in the wet-cupping group during 4 weeks (p = 0.09). The ODQ score did not show significant differences between the two groups (-5.60 [-8.90 to -2.30] in the wet-cupping group and -1.8 [-5.8 to 2.2] in the waiting-list group, p = 0.14). There was no report of adverse events due to wet-cupping.This pilot study may provide preliminary data on the effectiveness and safety of wet-cupping treatments for PNSLBP. Future full-scale randomised controlled trials will be needed to provide firm evidence of the effectiveness of this intervention.

Project description:BackgroundWe aimed to investigate the effectiveness of two different forms of dry pulsatile cupping in patients with chronic low back pain (cLBP) compared to medication on demand only in a three-armed randomized trial.Methods110 cLBP patients were randomized to regular pulsatile cupping with 8 treatments plus paracetamol on demand (n = 37), minimal cupping with 8 treatments plus paracetamol on demand (n = 36) or the control group with paracetamol on demand only (n = 37). Primary outcome was the pain intensity on a visual analogue scale (VAS, 0-100 mm) after 4 weeks, secondary outcome parameter included VAS pain intensity after 12 weeks, back function as measured with the 'Funktionsfragebogen Hannover Rücken' (FFbH-R) and health related quality of life questionnaire Short form 36 (SF-36) after 4 and 12 weeks.ResultsThe mean baseline-adjusted VAS after 4 weeks was 34.9 mm (95% CI: 28.7; 41.2) for pulsatile cupping, 40.4 (34.2; 46.7) for minimal cupping and 56.1 (49.8; 62.4) for control group, resulting in statistically significant differences between pulsatile cupping vs. control (21.2 (12.2; 30.1); p < 0.001) and minimal cupping vs. control (15.7 (6.9; 24.4); p = 0.001). After 12 weeks, mean adjusted VAS difference between pulsatile cupping vs. control was 15.1 ((3.1; 27.1); p = 0.014), and between minimal cupping vs. control 11.5 ((- 0.44; 23.4); p = 0.059). Differences of VAS between pulsatile cupping and minimal cupping showed no significant differences after 4 or 12 weeks. Pulsatile cupping was also better (- 5.8 (- 11.5;-0.1); p = 0.045) compared to control for back function after 4 weeks, but not after 12 weeks (- 5.4 (- 11.7;0.8); p = 0.088), pulsatile cupping also showed better improvements on SF-36 physical component scale compared to control at 4 and 12 weeks (- 5.6 (- 9.3;-2.0); p = 0.003; - 6.1 (- 9.9;-2.4); p = 0.002). For back function and quality of life minimal cupping group was not statistically different to control after 4 and 12 weeks. Paracetamol intake did not differ between the groups (cupping vs. control (7.3 (- 0.4;15.0); p = 0.063); minimal cupping vs. control (6.3 (- 2.0;14.5); p = 0.133).ConclusionsBoth forms of cupping were effective in cLBP without showing significant differences in direct comparison after four weeks, only pulsatile cupping showed effects compared to control after 12 weeks.Trial registrationThe study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT02090686 ).

Project description:BackgroundTelerehabilitation can facilitate multidisciplinary management for people with nonspecific chronic low back pain (NCLBP). It provides health care access to individuals who are physically and economically disadvantaged.ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of telerehabilitation compared with a clinic-based intervention for people with NCLBP in Nigeria.MethodsA cost-utility analysis alongside a randomized controlled trial from a health care perspective was conducted. Patients with NCLBP were assigned to either telerehabilitation-based McKenzie therapy (TBMT) or clinic-based McKenzie therapy (CBMT). Interventions were carried out 3 times weekly for a period of 8 weeks. Patients' level of disability was measured using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) at baseline, week 4, and week 8. To estimate the health-related quality of life of the patients, the ODI was mapped to the short-form six dimensions instrument to generate quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Health care resource use and costs were assessed based on the McKenzie extension protocol in Nigeria in 2019. Descriptive and inferential data analyses were also performed to assess the clinical effectiveness of the interventions. Bootstrapping was conducted to generate the point estimate of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).ResultsA total of 47 patients (TBMT, n=21 and CBMT, n=26), with a mean age of 47 (SD 11.6) years for telerehabilitation and 50 (SD 10.7) years for the clinic-based intervention, participated in this study. The mean cost estimates of TBMT and CBMT interventions per person were 22,200 naira (US $61.7) and 38,200 naira (US $106), respectively. QALY gained was 0.085 for TBMT and 0.084 for CBMT. The TBMT arm was associated with an additional 0.001 QALY (95% CI 0.001 to 0.002) per participant compared with the CBMT arm. Thus, the ICER showed that the TBMT arm was less costly and more effective than the CBMT arm.ConclusionsThe findings of the study suggested that telerehabilitation for people with NCLBP was cost saving. Given the small number of participants in this study, further examination of effects and costs of the interventions is needed within a larger sample size. In addition, future studies are required to assess the cost-effectiveness of this intervention in the long term from the patient and societal perspective.

Project description:IntroductionNonspecific chronic low back pain (NCLBP) became a public health and economic problem. Acupoint injection was used widely for patients with NCLBP. However, there were inconsistent results on the efficacy for these people. Therefore, this review was performed to systematically assess the efficacy and safety of acupoint injection.Materials and methodsThe literature sources were collected via EMBASE, Medline, CENTRAL, CINAHL, CNKI, VIP, Wanfang, and Sino-Med Database from their inception to October 13, 2019. Endnote X7, widely used document management software, was used to manage and screen the literature sources. Each record was screened according to the predetermined inclusion criteria by two review authors independently. Quality assessment tool, "Risk of table," was used to assess the quality of the included studies according to the recommendation of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Data extraction was performed by one reviewer and verified by another reviewer. Any disagreement was addressed via consulting with a third reviewer in the abovementioned processes. All procedures were performed according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.ResultsThis review included 13 studies involving 1381 patients with NCLBP. Quantitative analysis results indicated that there is no sufficient evidence that acupoint injection can improve the pain of patients with low back pain based on two trails: Visual Analogue Scale (VAS: MD = -1.33, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) -3.30 to 0.64, P=0.18, random-effect model). When assessing the effectiveness of acupoint injection therapy, the results indicated that acupoint injection can improve the effective rate for nonspecific chronic low back pain (OR = 3.64, 95% CI 2.4 to 5.21, P < 0.0001, fixed-effect model).ConclusionThere is insufficient evidence to indicate that acupoint injection therapy could improve the pain for patients with NCLBP. However, the level of evidence was downgraded to "very low quality" because of the poor methodological quality and clinical heterogeneity. The results should be interpreted with caution. Higher quality RCTs with more appropriate comparison, more objective outcome instruments, and adequate follow-up periods are necessary to assess the efficacy of acupoint injection for NCLBP. The PROSPERO Research registration identifying number is CRD42019119158.

Dataset Information

The Use of Wet Cupping for Persistent Nonspecific Low Back Pain: Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.

Objectives

Design

Setting

Patients

Interventions

Outcome measures

Results

Conclusions

Publications

The Use of Wet Cupping for Persistent Nonspecific Low Back Pain: Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets