Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35129852›Full record

Trial reportEuropean journal of pain (London, England)2022

Placebo response varies between different types of sham acupuncture: A randomized double-blind trial in neck pain patients.

Dian Zeng, Xiaoxia Yan, Hongmei Deng, Jiemei Li, Jiaxin Xiao, Jiawei Yuan, Jianpeng Huang, Nenggui Xu, Wenbin Fu, Jianhua Liu

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in European journal of pain (London, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Acute Effect of Percutaneous Tibial Nerve Stimulation on Postural Control: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Physiotherapy research international : the journal for researchers and clinicians in physical therapy · 2025
    Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Dian ZengAcupuncture Research Team, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Xiaoxia YanAcupuncture Research Team, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Hongmei DengAcupuncture Research Team, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Jiemei LiAcupuncture Research Team, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Jiaxin XiaoAcupuncture Research Team, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Jiawei YuanAcupuncture Research Team, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Jianpeng HuangAcupuncture Research Team, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Nenggui XuSouth China Research Center for Acupuncture, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Wenbin FuAcupuncture Research Team, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Jianhua LiuAcupuncture Research Team, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn prospective experimental studies of neck pain patients, it is difficult to determine whether responses to sham acupuncture differ from responses to real acupuncture due to the heterogeneous methodologies in control/sham interventions. Here we aim to compare the specific and nonspecific effects of electroacupuncture with four types of sham acupuncture.

methodsIn this double-blind, sham-controlled study, we randomly assigned 175 patients with neck pain to receive 10 sessions of electroacupuncture, shallow puncture, nonacupoint deep puncture, nonacupoint shallow puncture, or nonpenetration acupuncture. We used the Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire (NPQ) as our primary outcome, and Short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire, visual analog scale (VAS), and Pain Threshold as secondary outcomes to measure the changes from baseline to a 3-month follow up.

resultsAll groups, except nonacupoint shallow puncture, had significant improvement in all outcome measurements. Electroacupuncture only showed superior improvements than the shallow puncture, nonacupoint shallow puncture, and nonpenetration groups when compared using the NPQ and VAS scale (*p < 0.001). Interestingly, the nonacupoint shallow puncture produced even less placebo response than nonpenetration acupuncture.

conclusionOur study demonstrates the high variability of placebo response among different types of sham controls depending on the depth of needle insertion and the puncture location. An important implication of our results is nonacupoint deep puncture produced similar analgesic effects as electroacupuncture. Our study may shed a new light on the predominant underlying mechanisms among different types of sham acupuncture controls, which can help with interpreting the effect of acupuncture in other studies.

trial registrationChinese clinical trial registry (ChiCTR-IOR-15006886). SIGNIFICANCE: This study compared the observed specific and nonspecific analgesia effect in four different types of sham acupuncture stimulation with neck pain patients, assessed by four outcomes. Although all of the sham controls produced significant reduction in neck pain, electroacupuncture had superior significant improvement. Importantly, placebo responses differed significantly between the sham controls and responses were inconsistent according to different outcome assessments. This study emphasizes the importance of taking into consideration which sham control and method of outcome measurement were used in a pain research study when evaluating its results.

Indexed as

Acupuncture TherapyElectroacupunctureDouble-Blind MethodHumansNeck PainPlacebo EffectProspective StudiesTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID35129852
PMCPMC9305463

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.