Specification of interventions and selection of controls in randomized controlled trials of acupuncture: a cross-sectional survey

被引:4
|
作者
Liu, Jiali [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Li, Ling [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Luo, Xiaochao [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Qin, Xuan [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Zhao, Ling [5 ]
Zhao, Jiping [6 ]
Zhou, Xu [7 ]
Liu, Yanmei [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Deng, Ke [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Ma, Yu [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Zou, Kang [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Sun, Xin [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Sichuan Univ, West China Hosp, Chinese Evidence Based Med Ctr, 37 Guo Xue Xiang, Chengdu 610041, Sichuan, Peoples R China
[2] Sichuan Univ, West China Hosp, Cochrane China Ctr, Chengdu 610041, Sichuan, Peoples R China
[3] NMPA Key Lab Real World Data Res & Evaluat Hainan, Chengdu, Peoples R China
[4] Sichuan Ctr Technol Innovat Real World Data, Chengdu, Peoples R China
[5] Chengdu Univ Tradit Chinese Med, Acupuncture & Tuina Sch, Chengdu, Peoples R China
[6] Beijing Univ Chinese Med, Dongzhimen Hosp, Dept Acupuncture & Moxibust, Beijing, Peoples R China
[7] Jiangxi Univ Tradit Chinese Med, Evidence Based Med Res Ctr, Sch Basic Sci, Nanchang, Jiangxi, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金; 国家重点研发计划;
关键词
acupuncture; cross-sectional survey; randomized controlled trial; sham acupuncture; specification of interventions; CLINICAL-TRIALS; SHAM;
D O I
10.1177/09645284221117848
中图分类号
R [医药、卫生];
学科分类号
10 ;
摘要
Objective: Specification of interventions and selection of controls are two methodological determinants for a successful acupuncture trial. However, current practice with respect to these two determinants is not fully understood. Thus, we conducted a cross-sectional survey to examine the specification of interventions and selection of controls among published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of acupuncture. Study design and setting: We searched PubMed for acupuncture RCTs published in core clinical journals and complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) journals from January 2010 to December 2019 (10 years) and included RCTs that assessed treatment effects of acupuncture versus any type of control. We used network meta-analyses to explore whether there were differential treatment effects in patients with chronic pain when using sham acupuncture as a control versus using waiting list or no treatment. Results: Most of the 319 eligible RCTs specified well the style of acupuncture (86.8%), traditional acupuncture point locations (96.2%), type of needle stimulation (90.3%) and needle retention time (85.6%). However, other acupuncture details were less-frequently specified, including response sought (65.5%), needle manipulation (50.5%), number of needle insertions (21.9%), angle and direction of insertion (31.3%), patient posture (32.3%) and co-interventions (22.9%). Sham acupuncture (41.4%) was the most frequently used control, followed by waiting list or no treatment (32.9%). There was no differential treatment effect when using sham acupuncture versus waiting list/no treatment as a control (standardized mean difference = -0.15, 95% confidence interval: -0.91 to 0.62). Conclusion: Over a decade of research practice, important gaps have remained in the specification of acupuncture interventions, including response sought, needle manipulation, and co-interventions. While sham acupuncture has been widely used, waiting list or no treatment may also be considered as an appropriate control.
引用
收藏
页码:524 / 537
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Reporting and data-sharing level of acupuncture randomised controlled trials: a cross-sectional study protocol
    Duan, Yuting
    Xu, Zhirui
    Li, Xinyu
    Zhao, Pinge
    Wu, Shengwei
    Chen, Zewei
    Guo, Jiewen
    Zhou, Yiye
    Tang, Chunzhi
    Yu, Lin
    BMJ OPEN, 2023, 13 (06):
  • [22] Risk of bias and methodological issues in randomised controlled trials of acupuncture for knee osteoarthritis: a cross-sectional study
    Jia, Pengli
    Tang, Li
    Yu, Jiajie
    Lee, Andy H.
    Zhou, Xu
    Kang, Deying
    Luo, Yanan
    Liu, Jiali
    Sun, Xin
    BMJ OPEN, 2018, 8 (03):
  • [23] Researchers' choice of pain scales in trials of children undergoing surgery: A cross-sectional analysis of systematically searched randomized controlled trials and survey of authors
    Gerstman, Michelle Diana
    Rolland, Lucie Renee
    Tramer, Martin Richard
    Habre, Walid
    Elia, Nadia
    PEDIATRIC ANESTHESIA, 2021, 31 (11) : 1194 - 1207
  • [24] Missing data were poorly reported and handled in randomized controlled trials with repeatedly measured continuous outcomes: a cross-sectional survey
    Ren, Yan
    Jia, Yulong
    Huang, Yunxiang
    Zhang, Yuanjin
    Li, Qianrui
    Yao, Minghong
    Li, Ling
    Li, Guowei
    Yang, Min
    Yan, Peijing
    Wang, Yuning
    Zou, Kang
    Sun, Xin
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2022, 148 : 27 - 38
  • [25] The association of funding source on effect size in randomized controlled trials: 2013–2015 – a cross-sectional survey and meta-analysis
    Alberto Falk Delgado
    Anna Falk Delgado
    Trials, 18
  • [26] Virtual controls as an alternative to randomized controlled trials for assessing efficacy of interventions
    Strayhorn, Joseph M., Jr.
    BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2021, 21 (01)
  • [27] Virtual controls as an alternative to randomized controlled trials for assessing efficacy of interventions
    Joseph M. Strayhorn
    BMC Medical Research Methodology, 21
  • [28] Outcome switching in randomized controlled oncology trials reporting on surrogate endpoints: a cross-sectional analysis
    Delgado, Alberto Falk
    Delgado, Anna Falk
    SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2017, 7
  • [29] Spin in the abstracts of randomized controlled trials of nurse-led care: A cross-sectional study
    Wang, Dongguang
    Wang, Lian
    Tong, Xiang
    Liu, Sitong
    Fan, Hong
    Zhang, Yonggang
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NURSING STUDIES, 2023, 145
  • [30] How prevalent are financial conflicts of interest in dermatology randomized controlled trials? A cross-sectional study
    Steele, L.
    Earp, E.
    Hong, A.
    CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL DERMATOLOGY, 2021, 46 (04) : 715 - 719