Trial reportJournal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)2022
Home-based transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation for high-normal blood pressure: A randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Home-based transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation for high-normal blood pressure: A randomized controlled trial.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2022Trial
- Effect of Transcutaneous Electrical Acupoint Stimulation on Postoperative Urinary Retention After Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer: Study Protocol for A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
- Comparative effectiveness of lifestyle interventions for prehypertension: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2025Article
- Efficacy and neural mechanism of acupuncture for essential hypertension: Study protocol for a randomized clinical trial.PloS one · 2025Article
- Article
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The authors investigated the effectiveness of home-based transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation (TEAS) combined with lifestyle modification on blood pressure (BP) control and explored the feasibility of the trial design in this prospective, randomized controlled trial. The authors recruited individuals with high-normal BP who had a systolic blood pressure (SBP) of 120-139 mm Hg and a diastolic blood pressure (DBP) of 80-89 mm Hg, or both. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either lifestyle modification combined with TEAS four times weekly for 12 weeks at home (intervention group) or solely lifestyle modification (control group). The primary outcome was the change in mean SBP at week 12 from the baseline measurement. A total of 60 participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio, and an intention-to-treat analysis was performed on all of the outcomes. The mean difference in the change in SBP for the intervention group (compared to the control) at week 12 was -3.85 mm Hg (95% CI: -7.58 to -.12; p = .043); for the DBP, the change was -2.27 mm Hg (95% CI: -5.76 to 1.23; p = .199). There was no difference in the proportion of progression to hypertension, quality of life, body mass index (BMI) or waist circumference. In addition, two participants reported TEAS-related adverse events. The authors found a reduction in SBP control in the pragmatic, home-based intervention by using TEAS combined with lifestyle modification in adults with high-normal BP. Trial Registration: The study was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR 1900024982) on August 6, 2019.
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.