Cherkin Daniel C, Sherman Karen J, Hogeboom Charissa J, Erro Janet H, Barlow William E, Deyo Richard A, Avins Andrew L
Center for Health Studies, Group Health Cooperative, Seattle, USA.
Trials. 2008 Feb 28;9:10. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-9-10.
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.
慢性背痛是一个重大的公共卫生问题,也是患者寻求针灸治疗的主要原因。因此,对针灸疗效进行客观评估对于就其在这种常见病症患者中的适当作用做出明智决策至关重要。本研究解决了困扰先前评估针灸治疗慢性下背痛研究的方法学缺陷。
将从西雅图和奥克兰的综合医疗保健系统中招募640名年龄在18至70岁之间、患有持续至少3个月下背痛的参与者(四个组每组160人)。他们将被随机分配到两种形式的中医针灸针刺(个体化或标准化)之一、一个“对照组”(模拟针灸)或继续接受常规医疗护理。将在7周内提供10次治疗。研究参与者以及评估参与者并提出个体化治疗方案的“诊断师”针灸师将对实际分配给每位参与者的针灸治疗不知情。提供治疗的“治疗师”针灸师不会不知情,但与参与者的言语互动将受到限制。主要结局指标是下背痛功能障碍和困扰程度的标准测量,将在基线时以及在第8、26和52周由对治疗分配不知情的电话访问员进行评估。还将测量总体健康状况、对背部护理的满意度、与背部相关的残疾天数以及用于背痛的医疗服务使用情况和费用。通过随机治疗分配比较结局的主要分析将是对基线值进行调整的协方差分析。对于这两个主要结局指标,本试验将有99%的把握度检测出所有四个治疗组之间存在最小临床显著差异,并且对于大多数两两比较有超过80%的把握度。次要分析将比较每组中临床意义上改善的参与者比例。
本试验的结果将有助于阐明针灸针刺作为慢性下背痛治疗方法的价值。
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00065585