Centre for Complementary Medicine Research, University of Western Sydney, NSW 2751, Australia.
Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2012;2012:857804. doi: 10.1155/2012/857804. Epub 2011 Nov 14.
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of acupuncture often find equivalent responses to real and placebo acupuncture despite both appearing superior to no treatment. This raises questions regarding the mechanisms of acupuncture, especially the contribution of patient expectancies. We systematically reviewed previous research assessing the relationship between expectancy and treatment responses following acupuncture, whether real or placebo. To be included, studies needed to assess and/or manipulate expectancies about acupuncture and relate these to at least one health-relevant outcome. Nine such independent studies were identified through systematic searches of Medline, PsycInfo, PubMed, and Cochrane Clinical Trials Register. The methodology and reporting of these studies were quite heterogeneous, meaning that meta-analysis was not possible. A descriptive review revealed that five studies found statistically significant effects of expectancy on a least one outcome, with three also finding evidence suggestive of an interaction between expectancy and type of acupuncture (real or placebo). While there were some trends in significant effects in terms of study characteristics, their generality is limited by the heterogeneity of study designs. The differences in design across studies highlight some important methodological considerations for future research in this area, particularly regarding whether to assess or manipulate expectancies and how best to assess expectancies.
随机对照试验(RCTs)经常发现针灸的真实和安慰剂反应相当,尽管两者似乎都优于不治疗。这就引发了关于针灸机制的问题,特别是患者期望的贡献。我们系统地回顾了以前的研究,评估了针灸治疗后(无论是真实的还是安慰剂)的期望与治疗反应之间的关系。为了被纳入,研究需要评估和/或操纵对针灸的期望,并将这些与至少一个与健康相关的结果联系起来。通过对 Medline、PsycInfo、PubMed 和 Cochrane 临床试验登记处的系统搜索,确定了 9 项这样的独立研究。这些研究的方法和报告非常多样化,因此无法进行荟萃分析。描述性综述表明,五项研究发现了期望对至少一项结果的统计学显著影响,其中三项也发现了期望与针灸类型(真实或安慰剂)之间相互作用的证据。尽管在研究特征方面存在一些显著影响的趋势,但由于研究设计的异质性,其普遍性受到限制。研究设计的差异突出了该领域未来研究的一些重要方法考虑因素,特别是关于是否评估或操纵期望以及如何最好地评估期望。