Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34167548›Full record

ArticleBMC complementary medicine and therapies2021

A cross-sectional study of traditional Chinese medicine practitioner's knowledge, treatment strategies and integration of practice of chronic pelvic pain in women.

Susan Arentz, Caroline Smith, Rebecca Redmond, Jason Abbott, Mike Armour

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC complementary medicine and therapies, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Susan ArentzNICM Health Research Institute, Western Sydney University, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith, NSW, 2751, Australia.
Caroline SmithNICM Health Research Institute, Western Sydney University, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith, NSW, 2751, Australia.
Rebecca RedmondAustralian Research Centre in Complementary and Integrative Medicine, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, NSW, Australia.
Jason AbbottSchool of Women's and Children's Health, University of New South Wales, Barker Street, Randwick, NSW, 2031, Australia.
Mike ArmourNICM Health Research Institute, Western Sydney University, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith, NSW, 2751, Australia. m.armour@westernsydney.edu.au.
Western Sydney University · AUTranslational Research Institute · AUUniversity of Technology Sydney · AUUNSW Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChronic pelvic pain (CPP) in women is persistent, intermittent cyclical and non-cyclical lower abdominal pain, lasting for more than 6 months. Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) is a popular treatment option for women's health conditions, but little is known about how treatment for CPP is delivered by TCM practitioners. The aim of this survey was to explore practitioners understanding and treatment of women with CPP, and how they integrate their management and care into the health care system.

methodAn online cross-sectional survey of registered TCM practitioners in Australia and New Zealand between May and October 2018. Survey domains included treatment characteristics (e.g. frequency), evaluation of treatment efficacy, referral networks, and sources of information that informed clinical decision making.

resultsOne hundred and twenty-two registered TCM practitioners responded to this survey, 91.7% reported regular treatment of women with CPP. Treatment decisions were most-often guided by a combination of biomedical and TCM diagnosis (77.6%), and once per week was the most common treatment frequency (66.7%) for acupuncture. Meditation (63.7%) and dietary changes (57.8%) were other commonly used approaches to management. The effectiveness of treatment was assessed using multiple approaches, most commonly pain scales, (such as the numeric rating scale) and any change in use of analgesic medications. Limitations to TCM treatment were reported by over three quarters (83.7%) of practitioners, most commonly due to cost (56.5%) and inconvenience (40.2%) rather than safety or lack of efficacy. Sources informing practice were most often Integration within the wider healthcare system was common with over two thirds (67.9%) receiving referrals from health care providers.

conclusionTCM practitioners seeing women with various CPP symptoms, commonly incorporate both traditional and modern diagnostic methods to inform their treatment plan, monitor treatment progress using commonly accepted approaches and measures and often as a part of multidisciplinary healthcare for women with CPP.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeMedicine, Chinese TraditionalAdultAustraliaChronic PainCross-Sectional StudiesDecision MakingFemaleHumansMaleNew ZealandPelvic PainSurveys and QuestionnairesAcupunctureDysmenorrheaDyspareuniaEndometriosisPersistent pelvic painVaginismusVulvodynia

Identifiers

PMID34167548
PMCPMC8229696
OpenAlexW3173645562

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.