Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29441114›Full record

ReviewEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2017

Chuna (or Tuina) Manual Therapy for Musculoskeletal Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Nam-Woo Lee, Gee-Heon Kim, In Heo, Koh-Woon Kim, In-Hyuk Ha, Jun-Hwan Lee, Eui-Hyoung Hwang, Byung-Cheul Shin

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Nam-Woo LeeSchool of Korean Medicine, Pusan National University, Yangsan 50612, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-2662-5944
Gee-Heon KimSchool of Korean Medicine, Pusan National University, Yangsan 50612, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-7196-4312
In HeoKorean Medicine Clinical Research Center, Korean Medicine Hospital, Pusan National University, Yangsan 50612, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-2893-8917
Koh-Woon KimDepartment of Korean Rehabilitation Medicine, Kyung Hee University, Seoul 02447, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-0353-6041
In-Hyuk HaJaseng Spine and Joint Research Institute, Jaseng Medical Foundation, Seoul 06017, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-5020-6723
Jun-Hwan LeeClinical Research Division, Korea Institute of Oriental Medicine, Daejeon 34054, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-5730-6869
Eui-Hyoung HwangDivision of Clinical Medicine, School of Korean Medicine, Pusan National University, Yangsan 50612, Republic of Korea.
Byung-Cheul ShinDivision of Clinical Medicine, School of Korean Medicine, Pusan National University, Yangsan 50612, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-0059-2689
Pusan National University · KRPusan National University Yangsan Hospital · KRJaseng Medical Foundation · KRKorea Institute of Oriental Medicine · KRKyung Hee University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo review the literature and systematically evaluate the effectiveness of Chuna (or Tuina) manual therapy (C[T]MT) on pain and function for musculoskeletal disorders.

methodsWe searched 15 English, Chinese, Japanese, and Korean databases using relevant keywords. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of C(T)MT for musculoskeletal disorders were considered, and we limited analyses to studies with a low-risk bias for randomization and/or allocation concealment.

resultsSixty-six RCTs with 6,170 participants were included. One sham-controlled RCT showed that C(T)MT relieved pain more effectively than a sham control (SMD -3.09 [-3.59, -2.59]). For active-controlled RCTs, pooled meta-analysis showed that C(T)MT had statistically significant effects on pain reduction, especially compared to traction (

conclusionsThis systematic review suggests that C(T)MT is safe and effective for pain reduction and functional improvement for musculoskeletal diseases; however, the evidence for functional improvement was not as strong as for pain reduction. For future studies, high-quality RCTs such as sham-controlled studies with standardized interventions are needed to provide sufficient evidence on the effects of C(T)MT for musculoskeletal diseases. Protocol registration number is CRD42016038307 04/07/2016.

Identifiers

PMID29441114
PMCPMC5758860
OpenAlexW2779599128

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.