ReviewJournal of pharmacopuncture2021
Effect of Manual Acupuncture for Mild-to-Moderate Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Systematic Review.
Review in Journal of pharmacopuncture, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness and safety of acupuncture for carpal tunnel syndrome: An overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.Integrative medicine research · 2024Review
- Laser Acupuncture Versus Electroacupuncture for Nonsevere Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Medical acupuncture · 2024Article
- A Data Mining Study for Analysis of Acupoint Selection and Combinations in Acupuncture Treatment of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome.Journal of pain research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesDespite the low cost and high accessibility of manual acupuncture (MA) treatments for the carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS), this intervention has not been uniformly evaluated in systematic reviews (SR), and no SR has evaluated MA monotherapy for CTS. This review was conducted to summarize the findings and undertake a quality assessment of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of acupuncture treatment methods for mild-to-moderate CTS to identify clinical evidence for the use of MA in CTS.
methodsWe searched five databases for articles on relevant RCTs that were published until June 2021 without imposing specific restrictions, such as age or sex, on CTS patients. RCTs that evaluated MA were included without any restriction on comparator interventions. Measurement tools for evaluating pain reduction and functional improvement or for evaluating efficacy using electrophysiological indicators were included as outcome measures.
resultsWe included seven RCTs, of which three studies reported both post-treatment improvement effects and statistical significance using p-values for all outcomes. Five studies reported statistically significant intergroup differences (p-values for all outcomes) in post-treatment improvement. None of the studies reported severe adverse effects of MA. In all of the RCTs, the reporting rates of the 2c, 2a, and 6a items of STRICTA 2010 were 14%, 29%, and 29%, respectively. PC7 (
conclusionMA can be used for CTS treatment without serious adverse effects. PC7 was the most commonly used acupoint. In order to ensure objective and reliable reporting, accurate standardization of acupuncture treatment methods acupoint terms should be undertaken in future RCTs.
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.