Almeida Silva Hugo Jário, Barbosa Germanna Medeiros, Scattone Silva Rodrigo, Saragiotto Bruno T, Oliveira Jaine Maria Pontes, Pinheiro Yago Tavares, Lins Caio Alano Almeida, de Souza Marcelo Cardoso
Postgraduate Program in Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences of Trairi, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN), Santa Cruz, Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil.
Faculty of Health Sciences of Trairi, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN), Santa Cruz, Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil.
J Physiother. 2021 Apr;67(2):132-139. doi: 10.1016/j.jphys.2021.02.013. Epub 2021 Mar 20.
What are the effects of dry cupping on pain intensity, physical function, functional mobility, trunk range of motion, perceived overall effect, quality of life, psychological symptoms and medication use in individuals with chronic non-specific low back pain?
Randomised controlled trial with concealed allocation, intention-to-treat analysis and blinding of participants and assessors.
Ninety participants with chronic non-specific low back pain.
The experimental group (n = 45) received dry cupping therapy, with cups bilaterally positioned parallel to the L1 to L5 vertebrae. The control group (n = 45) received sham cupping therapy. The interventions were applied once a week for 8 weeks.
Participants were assessed before and after the first treatment session, and after 4 and 8 weeks of intervention. The primary outcome was pain intensity, measured with the numerical pain scale at rest, during fast walking and during trunk flexion. Secondary outcomes were physical function, functional mobility, trunk range of motion, perceived overall effect, quality of life, psychological symptoms and medication use.
On a 0-to-10 scale, the between-group difference in pain severity at rest was negligible: MD 0.0 (95% CI -0.9 to 1.0) immediately after the first treatment, 0.4 (95% CI -0.5 to 1.5) at 4 weeks and 0.6 (95% CI -0.4 to 1.6) at 8 weeks. Similar negligible effects were observed on pain severity during fast walking or trunk flexion. Negligible effects were also found on physical function, functional mobility and perceived overall effect, where mean estimates and their confidence intervals all excluded worthwhile effects. No worthwhile benefits could be confirmed for any of the remaining secondary outcomes.
Dry cupping therapy was not superior to sham cupping for improving pain, physical function, mobility, quality of life, psychological symptoms or medication use in people with non-specific chronic low back pain.
NCT03909672.
对于患有慢性非特异性下背痛的个体,干拔罐疗法对疼痛强度、身体功能、功能活动能力、躯干活动范围、总体感受效果、生活质量、心理症状及药物使用有何影响?
采用随机对照试验,实施隐蔽分组、意向性分析,并对参与者和评估者进行盲法处理。
90名患有慢性非特异性下背痛的参与者。
实验组(n = 45)接受干拔罐疗法,火罐双侧平行放置于L1至L5椎骨处。对照组(n = 45)接受假拔罐疗法。干预措施每周进行一次,共8周。
在首次治疗前、首次治疗后、干预第4周和第8周对参与者进行评估。主要结局指标为疼痛强度,通过静息时、快速行走时和躯干前屈时的数字疼痛量表进行测量。次要结局指标包括身体功能、功能活动能力、躯干活动范围、总体感受效果、生活质量、心理症状及药物使用。
在0至10分的量表上,首次治疗后即刻,静息时疼痛严重程度的组间差异可忽略不计:MD为0.0(95%CI -0.9至1.0);4周时为0.4(95%CI -0.5至1.5);8周时为0.6(95%CI -0.4至1.6)。在快速行走或躯干前屈时的疼痛严重程度方面也观察到类似的可忽略不计的效果。在身体功能、功能活动能力和总体感受效果方面也发现了可忽略不计的效果,平均估计值及其置信区间均排除了有价值的效果。对于其余任何次要结局指标,均未证实有值得关注的益处。
对于患有非特异性慢性下背痛的人群,在改善疼痛、身体功能、活动能力、生活质量、心理症状或药物使用方面,干拔罐疗法并不优于假拔罐疗法。
NCT03909672。