School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China; Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China; Key Laboratory of Evidence Based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, China.
Affiliated Hospital of Gansu University of Chinese Medicine, Lanzhou, China.
Pain Physician. 2017 Sep;20(6):E883-E902.
Acupuncture techniques are commonly used as initial treatments for myofascial pain syndrome.
This study aimed to assess and compare the efficacy and safety of different techniques of acupuncture for myofascial pain syndrome.
Network meta-analysis.
All selected studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database were searched from their inceptions to February 2016. Only full texts of RCTs comparing acupuncture therapies with any other therapies or placebo-sham acupuncture were included. Two reviewers independently assessed eligibility and extracted data. The primary outcomes included pain intensity, PPT, and adverse events. Secondary outcome was physical function.
Thirty-three trials with 1,692 patients were included. Patients were allocated to 22 kinds of interventions, of which dry needling and manual acupuncture was the most frequently investigated intervention. Compared with placebo-sham acupuncture, scraping combined with warming acupuncture and moxibustion was found to be more effective for decreasing pain intensity (standardized mean difference (SMD) = -3.6, 95% confidence interval (CI) ranging from -5.2 to -2.1); miniscalpel-needle was more effective for increasing the PPT (SMD = 2.2, 95% CI ranging from 1.2 to 3.1); trigger points injection with bupivacaine was associated with the highest risk of adverse event (odds ratio = 557.2, 95% CI ranging from 3.6 to 86867.3); and only EA showed a significant difference in the ROM (SMD = -4.4, 95% CI ranging from -7.5 to -1.3).
Lack of clarity concerning treatment periods, repetitive RCTs, and other valuable outcome measurements. The potential bias might affect the judgment of efficacy and safety.
The existing evidence suggests that most acupuncture therapies, including acupuncture combined with other therapies, are effective in decreasing pain and in improving physical function, but additional investigation on the safety of these therapies is required.Key words: Myofascial pain syndrome, acupuncture, anesthesia, efficacy, safety, network meta-analysis, systematic review, randomized controlled trials.
针刺技术常用于肌筋膜疼痛综合征的初始治疗。
本研究旨在评估和比较不同针刺技术治疗肌筋膜疼痛综合征的疗效和安全性。
网络荟萃分析。
所有入选研究均为随机对照试验(RCT)。
从 Cochrane 中央对照试验注册库、PubMed、Web of Science、EMBASE 和中国生物医学文献数据库检索自建库起至 2016 年 2 月的研究。仅纳入比较针刺疗法与任何其他疗法或安慰性假针刺的 RCT 的全文。两位评审员独立评估入选标准和提取数据。主要结局指标包括疼痛强度、PPT 和不良事件。次要结局指标为躯体功能。
纳入 33 项 RCT,共 1692 例患者。患者被分配至 22 种干预措施,其中最常研究的干预措施为干针和手动针刺。与安慰性假针刺相比,刮痧联合温针灸和艾灸更能有效降低疼痛强度(标准化均数差(SMD)=-3.6,95%置信区间(CI)范围为-5.2 至-2.1);针刀更能有效增加 PPT(SMD=2.2,95%CI 范围为 1.2 至 3.1);布比卡因肌筋膜触发点注射与不良事件风险最高相关(比值比=557.2,95%CI 范围为 3.6 至 86867.3);仅电针在 ROM 方面有显著差异(SMD=-4.4,95%CI 范围为-7.5 至-1.3)。
缺乏对治疗周期的说明、重复 RCT 及其他有价值的结局测量,潜在偏倚可能影响疗效和安全性的判断。
现有证据表明,包括针刺联合其他疗法在内的大多数针刺疗法均能有效减轻疼痛和改善躯体功能,但需要进一步研究这些疗法的安全性。
肌筋膜疼痛综合征,针刺,麻醉,疗效,安全性,网络荟萃分析,系统评价,随机对照试验。