Dataset Information

Efficacy and central mechanism of acupuncture treatment in patients with neck pain: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Acupuncture is effective for reducing the symptoms of neck pain (NP). However, the underlying mechanisms are not fully elucidated. Based on evaluating the efficacy of two acupuncture prescriptions for treating NP, this study aims to investigate the potential central mechanism of acupuncture treatment for NP by functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI).

Methods

This is a randomized controlled trial; 86 patients will be randomly assigned into two acupuncture treatment groups at a ratio of 1:1. The whole study period includes 2 weeks baseline, 2 weeks treatments, and 12 weeks follow-up (4 and 12 weeks after treatment). The pain severity, the neck disability index, the cervical range of motion, and the pressure pain threshold, etc., will be used to evaluate the clinical efficacy of two acupuncture prescriptions for NP treatment. The MRI scans will be performed to detect cerebral activity changes of 20 patients in each group. The clinical data and MRI data will be analyzed, respectively. Pearson correlation coefficient will be used to evaluate the association between changes of cerebral activity features and improvement of clinical symptoms.

Discussion

The results will provide further evidence for the clinical application of acupuncture in the treatment of NP.

Trial registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2000040930 . Registered on 16 December 2020.

SUBMITTER: Gao Z

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8364082 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThis study aims to provide evidence regarding the clinical efficacy of abdominal acupuncture for neck pain.MethodsThis randomized, patient and assessor-blind, sham-controlled trial was conducted at a Chinese medicine center in Hong Kong between November 2014 and March 2016. A total of 154 eligible participants (age range, 18-65 years) with neck pain were randomly assigned to receive abdominal (n = 77) or non-penetrating sham abdominal (sham group; n = 77) acupuncture. Each participant was administered treatment over six sessions by Registered Chinese Medicine Practitioners, in accordance with a standardized protocol. The primary outcome was mean improvement in neck pain disability scores evaluated by the Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire (NPQ). Secondary outcomes included intensity of neck pain and health-related quality-of-life measures. The outcomes were assessed at baseline and at 2 and 6 weeks from baseline. Patients in the abdominal acupuncture group received additional follow-up evaluation at 14 weeks from baseline. Outcomes were evaluated by intention-to-treat analysis.ResultsAll participants provided informed consent for treatment and follow-up evaluation. Patients who received abdominal acupuncture exhibited greater improvement in NPQ scores than those who received sham treatment at both 2 and 6 weeks from baseline (intergroup mean differences, -5.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], -9.48 to -2.03; P = 0.008 and -8.65; 95% CI, -12.13 to -5.16; P < 0.001, respectively). The improvement in NPQ scores in the abdominal acupuncture group was even more significant at 14 weeks from baseline. Patients in the abdominal acupuncture group also exhibited significantly greater improvements in intensity of neck pain and a few quality-of-life measures than those in the sham abdominal acupuncture group, without any serious adverse events.ConclusionThese findings suggest that abdominal acupuncture is an effective alternative treatment for neck pain.Trial registrationChinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR-TRC-14004932.

Project description:Chronic back pain is a major public health problem and the primary reason patients seek acupuncture treatment. Therefore, an objective assessment of acupuncture efficacy is critical for making informed decisions about its appropriate role for patients with this common condition. This study addresses methodological shortcomings that have plagued previous studies evaluating acupuncture for chronic low back pain.A total of 640 participants (160 in each of four arms) between the ages of 18 and 70 years of age who have low back pain lasting at least 3 months will be recruited from integrated health care delivery systems in Seattle and Oakland. They will be randomized to one of two forms of Traditional Chinese Medical (TCM) acupuncture needling (individualized or standardized), a "control" group (simulated acupuncture), or to continued usual medical care. Ten treatments will be provided over 7 weeks. Study participants and the "Diagnostician" acupuncturists who evaluate participants and propose individualized treatments will be masked to the acupuncture treatment actually assigned each participant. The "Therapist" acupuncturists providing the treatments will not be masked but will have limited verbal interaction with participants. The primary outcomes, standard measures of dysfunction and bothersomeness of low back pain, will be assessed at baseline, and after 8, 26, and 52 weeks by telephone interviewers masked to treatment assignment. General health status, satisfaction with back care, days of back-related disability, and use and costs of healthcare services for back pain will also be measured. The primary analysis comparing outcomes by randomized treatment assignment will be analysis of covariance adjusted for baseline value. For both primary outcome measures, this trial will have 99% power to detect the presence of a minimal clinically significant difference among all four treatment groups and over 80% power for most pairwise comparisons. Secondary analyses will compare the proportions of participants in each group that improve by a clinically meaningful amount.Results of this trial will help clarify the value of acupuncture needling as a treatment for chronic low back pain.Clinical Trials.gov NCT00065585.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Acupuncture is increasingly being used for many conditions including chronic neck pain. However the evidence remains inconclusive, indicating the need for further well-designed research. The aim of this study was to conduct a pilot randomised controlled parallel arm trial, to establish key features required for the design and implementation of a large-scale trial on acupuncture for chronic neck pain. METHODS: Patients whose GPs had diagnosed neck pain were recruited from one general practice, and randomised to receive usual GP care only, or acupuncture (up to 10 treatments over 3 months) as an adjunctive treatment to usual GP care. The primary outcome measure was the Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire (NPQ) at 3 months. The primary analysis was to determine the sample size for the full scale study. RESULTS: Of the 227 patients with neck pain identified from the GP database, 28 (12.3%) consenting patients were eligible to participate in the pilot and 24 (10.5%) were recruited to the trial. Ten patients were randomised to acupuncture, receiving an average of eight treatments from one of four acupuncturists, and 14 were randomised to usual GP care alone. The sample size for the full scale trial was calculated from a clinically meaningful difference of 5% on the NPQ and, from this pilot, an adjusted standard deviation of 15.3%. Assuming 90% power at the 5% significance level, a sample size of 229 would be required in each arm in a large-scale trial when allowing for a loss to follow-up rate of 14%. In order to achieve this sample, one would need to identify patients from databases of GP practices with a total population of 230,000 patients, or approximately 15 GP practices roughly equal in size to the one involved in this study (i.e. 15,694 patients). CONCLUSION: This pilot study has allowed a number of recommendations to be made to facilitate the design of a large-scale trial, which in turn will help to clarify the existing evidence base on acupuncture for neck pain.

Project description:BackgroundChronic neck pain (CNP) is a common and disabling musculoskeletal disorder in developing and developed countries. Previous studies have shown that tuina and traditional Chinese massage are effective treatments for patients with CNP. However, there is little evidence to support the use of one intervention over the other. The aim of this study is to compare the effects of tuina and traditional Chinese massage in the treatment of pain and disability in patients with CNP.Methods/designThis is a multicenter, assessor- and analyst-blinded, randomized controlled trial with two parallel arms: a tuina group and a traditional Chinese massage group. A total of 356 eligible CNP patients will be randomly assigned to the groups in a 1:1 ratio. The intervention in the tuina group includes both structural and relaxation massage, while the traditional Chinese massage group will receive relaxation massage only. The interventions for both groups will last for 15?min and will be carried out three times a week for a period of 4?weeks. The primary outcome will be changes in the Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes will be measured by a visual analogue scale (VAS), the Neck Disability Index (NDI), and the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). The data will be analyzed at the baseline, at the end of the intervention, and during the 3?months of follow-up by repeated measures analysis of variance. The significance level is 5%. The safety of tuina and traditional Chinese massage will be evaluated after each treatment session. The results of this trial will help clarify the value of tuina and traditional Chinese massage as treatments for CNP and will highlight any differences in the efficacy of the treatments.DiscussionThe purpose of this trial is to determine whether tuina is more effective than traditional Chinese massage in adults with CNP. This trial will, therefore, contribute to providing a solid foundation for clinical treatment of CNP, as well as future research in massage therapy.Trial registrationChinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR-INR-17013763 . Registered 8 December 2017.

Project description:IntroductionChronic neck pain is a challenging condition to treat in clinical practice and has a considerable impact on quality of life and disability. According to the theory of traditional Chinese medicine, acupoints and tender points may become sensitised when the body is in a diseased state. Stimulation of such sensitive points may lead to disease improvement and improved clinical efficacy. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of needling at sensitive acupoints in providing pain relief, improvement of cervical vertebral function and quality of life in patients with chronic neck pain.Methods and analysisThis multicentre, randomised controlled, explanatory and parallel clinical trial will include 716 patients with chronic neck pain. Study participants will be randomly assigned in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to four treatment groups: the highly sensitive acupoints group, low/non-sensitive acupoints group, sham acupuncture group and waiting-list control group. The primary outcome will be the change in the visual analogue scale score for neck pain from baseline to 4 weeks. Secondary outcomes will be the Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire and McGill pain questionnaire, 12-item Short-Form health survey, Neck Disability Index, changes in the pressure pain threshold, range of cervical motion, Self-Rating Anxiety Scale, Self-Rating Depression Scale and adverse events before treatment, post-treatment, and at 4, 8, 12, 16 and 20 weeks post-treatment. The intention-to-treat approach will be used in the statistical analysis. Group comparisons will be undertaken using χ2 tests for categorical characteristics, and analysis of variance for continuous variables to analyse whether acupuncture in the highly sensitive acupoints group achieves better treatment outcomes than in each of the other three groups.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval of this study has been granted by the local Institutional Review Board (ID: 2017 KL-038). The outcomes of the trial will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications.Trial registration numberChiCTR1800016371; Pre-results.