Helfgott Research Institute, National College of Natural Medicine, 049 SW Porter Street, Portland, OR 97201, USA.
Acupunct Med. 2011 Dec;29(4):270-5. doi: 10.1136/acupmed-2011-010021. Epub 2011 Oct 14.
To provide an in-depth analysis of seven well-reported studies that examined electrodermal activity (EDA) at acupuncture points with regard to three commonly held tenets of acupuncture: (1) EDA at pathology-related acupuncture points is distinguishable from non-pathology-related acupuncture points; (2) EDA at acupuncture points can assist in diagnosing and monitoring therapeutic progress; and (3) EDA at acupuncture points is able to identify substances that are either therapeutically beneficial or toxic to an individual.
Seven of 29 studies that scored>50% on their quality of reporting 54 essential technical and clinical details of EDA testing in human patients were identified from a previous literature review. Fourteen categories of data were extracted from these seven studies for further discussion.
Two studies compared EDA at pathology-related auricular acupuncture points to non-pathology-related sites. Two studies correlated EDA measurements at sites other than auricular acupuncture points with the presence of specific medical conditions. The final three studies assessed changes in EDA at acupuncture points on the fingers and toes when different substances were placed in the electrical circuit with the patient.
This review highlights the heterogeneity of approaches to EDA assessments and the discrepancies between common clinical practice and the scientific evidence to support that practice. It also provides pilot data that suggest EDA testing at auricular acupuncture points may distinguish pathology-related acupuncture points from non-pathology-related points; decreased skin conductance correlates with tiredness or low energy; and EDA testing at the Jing-Well acupuncture points, on the tips of the fingers and toes, may assist in monitoring effectiveness of acupuncture treatment. The evidence does not support the use of VEGA testing for allergic status.
深入分析七项研究报告,这些报告针对针灸的三个普遍原则,检查了穴位的皮肤电活动(EDA):(1)与病理相关的穴位的 EDA 与非病理相关的穴位区分开来;(2)穴位的 EDA 可用于诊断和监测治疗进展;(3)穴位的 EDA 能够识别对个体有益或有毒的物质。
从之前的文献综述中,确定了在之前的文献综述中,在 29 项研究中,有 7 项研究的评分>50%,报告了 54 项 EDA 测试的基本技术和临床细节。从这 7 项研究中提取了 14 类数据,以进行进一步讨论。
两项研究比较了与病理相关的耳穴与非病理相关穴位的 EDA。两项研究将穴位以外的 EDA 测量值与特定的医疗条件相关联。最后三项研究评估了当将不同物质放入患者的电路中时,手指和脚趾上的穴位的 EDA 变化。
本综述强调了 EDA 评估方法的异质性,以及常见临床实践与支持该实践的科学证据之间的差异。它还提供了初步数据,表明耳穴的 EDA 测试可能将与病理相关的穴位与非病理相关的穴位区分开来;皮肤电导降低与疲倦或能量低下有关;指尖的 Jing-Well 穴位的 EDA 测试可能有助于监测针灸治疗的效果。该证据不支持 VEGA 测试用于过敏状态。