Lundeberg Thomas, Lund Iréne, Näslund Jan, Thomas Moolamanil
Foundation fo Acupuncture and Alternative Biological Treatment Methods, Sabbatsbergs Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Acupunct Med. 2008 Dec;26(4):239-42. doi: 10.1136/aim.26.4.239.
During the last five years a large number of randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) have been published on the efficacy of acupuncture in different conditions. In most of these studies verum is compared with sham acupuncture. In general both verum and sham have been found to be effective, and often with little reported difference in outcome. This has repeatedly led to the conclusion that acupuncture is no more effective than placebo treatment. However, this conclusion is based on the assumption that sham acupuncture is inert. Since sham acupuncture evidently is merely another form of acupuncture from the physiological perspective, the assumption that sham is sham is incorrect and conclusions based on this assumption are therefore invalid. Clinical guidelines based on such conclusions may therefore exclude suffering patients from valuable treatments.
在过去五年中,大量关于针灸在不同病症中疗效的随机对照临床试验(RCT)已经发表。在这些研究中的大多数,真针灸与假针灸进行了比较。总体而言,真针灸和假针灸都被发现是有效的,而且在结果上通常报道差异很小。这一再导致这样的结论:针灸并不比安慰剂治疗更有效。然而,这个结论是基于假针灸是无活性的这一假设。由于从生理学角度来看,假针灸显然仅仅是针灸的另一种形式,认为假针灸就是假的这一假设是不正确的,因此基于此假设得出的结论是无效的。基于此类结论的临床指南可能会因此使痛苦的患者无法获得有价值的治疗。