Trial reportBMJ open2018
Electroacupuncture as a complement to usual care for patients with non-acute low back pain after back surgery: a pilot randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01966250 (Electroacupuncture as a Complement to Usual Care for Patients With Non-acute Pain After Back Surgery), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Electroacupuncture as a Complement to Usual Care for Patients With Non-acute Pain After Back Surgery: a Study Protocol for a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dropouts in randomized clinical trials of Korean medicine interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Trials · 2021Pooled it
- Trial
- Comparative Efficacy of Physical Agent Therapies for Chronic Low Back Pain-A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Journal of pain research · 2026Review
- Invasive laser acupuncture vs. electroacupuncture for non-specific chronic low back pain: protocol for a randomized clinical trial.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Review
- Efficacy and Key Materials of East Asian Herbal Medicine Combined with Conventional Medicine on Inflammatory Skin Lesion in Patients withPharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Research Status and Prospects of Acupuncture in Perioperative Medicine Over the Past Decade: A Bibliometric Analysis.Journal of pain research · 2023Review
- Evaluating the Quality of Reports About Randomized Controlled Trials of Acupuncture for Low Back Pain.Journal of pain research · 2021Review
- Association of Cost and Medical Service Satisfaction with Korean and Conventional Medicine Use before and after Surgery in Postsurgical Patients: A Questionnaire Survey of Korean Patients with Postsurgical Pain Visiting Korean Medicine Hospitals.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2020Article
- Effect of Acupuncture on Chronic Pain with Depression: A Systematic Review.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this pilot study was to estimate the sample size for a large pragmatic study of the comparative effectiveness of electroacupuncture (EA) for low back pain (LBP) after back surgery.
designA randomised, active-controlled, assessor-blinded trial.
participantsPatients with recurrent or persistent LBP, defined as a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score of ≥50 mm, with or without leg pain after back surgery.
interventionsPatients were randomised to an EA plus usual care (UC) group or to a UC alone group at a 1:1 ratio. Patients assigned to each group received UC, including drug therapy, physical therapy and back pain education, twice a week for 4 weeks; those assigned to the EA plus UC group additionally received EA. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was severity of LBP as measured by VAS. Secondary outcomes included back pain-related disability, assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and quality of life, assessed using the EuroQol Five Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire. Statistical analysis was performed using paired and independent t-tests. A p value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant.
resultsThirty-nine patients were allocated to receive EA plus UC (n=18) or UC alone (n=21). There was no statistically significant difference in VAS or EQ-5D scores between the two groups, but there was a significant decrease in ODI scores (p=0.0081). Using G*Power, it was calculated that 40 participants per group would be needed for a future trial according to VAS scores. Considering for a 25% dropout rate, 108 participants (54 per group) would be needed.
conclusionsA future trial addressing the risk of bias and including the estimated sample size would allow for better clinical assessment of the benefits of EA plus UC in treatment of patients with non-acute pain after back surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01966250; Results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.