Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35943743›Full record

Trial reportJAMA network open2022

Effect of Adjunctive Acupuncture on Pain Relief Among Emergency Department Patients With Acute Renal Colic Due to Urolithiasis: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Jian-Feng Tu, Ying Cao, Li-Qiong Wang, Guang-Xia Shi, Lian-Cheng Jia, Bao-Li Liu, Wei-Hai Yao, Xiao-Lu Pei, Yan Cao, He-Wen Li and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
13.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

14 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jian-Feng TuInternational Acupuncture and Moxibustion Innovation Institute, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Ying CaoEmergency Department, Beijing Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Li-Qiong WangInternational Acupuncture and Moxibustion Innovation Institute, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Guang-Xia ShiInternational Acupuncture and Moxibustion Innovation Institute, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Lian-Cheng JiaUrinary Surgery, Beijing Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Bao-Li LiuOffice of Academic Research, Beijing Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Wei-Hai YaoEmergency Department, Beijing Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Xiao-Lu PeiEmergency Department, Beijing Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Yan CaoInternational Acupuncture and Moxibustion Innovation Institute, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
He-Wen LiInternational Acupuncture and Moxibustion Innovation Institute, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Shi-Yan YanInternational Acupuncture and Moxibustion Innovation Institute, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Jing-Wen YangInternational Acupuncture and Moxibustion Innovation Institute, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Zhi-Cheng QuEmergency Department, Beijing Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Cun-Zhi LiuInternational Acupuncture and Moxibustion Innovation Institute, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Beijing University of Chinese Medicine · CNBeijing Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNCapital Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Renal colic is described as one of the worst types of pain, and effective analgesia in the shortest possible time is of paramount importance. Objectives: To examine whether acupuncture, as an adjunctive therapy to analgesics, could accelerate pain relief in patients with acute renal colic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This single-center, sham-controlled, randomized clinical trial was conducted in an emergency department in China between March 2020 and September 2020. Participants with acute renal colic (visual analog scale [VAS] score ≥4) due to urolithiasis were recruited. Data were analyzed from October 2020 to January 2022. Interventions: After diagnosis and randomization, all patients received 50 mg/2 mL of diclofenac sodium intramuscular injection immediately followed by 30-minute acupuncture or sham acupuncture. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the response rate at 10 minutes after needle manipulation, which was defined as the proportion of participants whose VAS score decreased by at least 50% from baseline. Secondary outcomes included response rates at 0, 5, 15, 20, 30, 45, and 60 minutes, rescue analgesia, and adverse events. Results: A total of 115 participants were screened and 80 participants (66 men [82.5%]; mean [SD] age, 45.8 [13.8] years) were enrolled, consisting of 40 per group. The response rates at 10 minutes were 77.5% (31 of 40) and 10.0% (4 of 40) in the acupuncture and sham acupuncture groups, respectively. The between-group differences were 67.5% (95% CI, 51.5% to 83.4%; P < .001). The response rates of acupuncture were also significantly higher than sham acupuncture at 0, 5, 15, 20 and 30 minutes, whereas no significant difference was detected at 45 and 60 minutes. However, there was no difference between the 2 groups in rescue analgesia rate (difference 2.5%; 95% CI -8.8% to 13.2%; P > .99). No adverse events occurred during the trial. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that acupuncture plus intramuscular injection of diclofenac is safe and provides fast and substantial pain relief for patients with renal colic compared with sham acupuncture in the emergency setting. However, no difference in rescue analgesia was found, possibly because of the ceiling effect caused by subsequent but robust analgesia of diclofenac. Acupuncture can be considered an optional adjunctive therapy in relieving acute renal colic. Trial Registration: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR1900025202.

Indexed as

Acupuncture TherapyRenal ColicUrolithiasisDiclofenacEmergency Service, HospitalHumansMaleMiddle AgedPainDiclofenac

Identifiers

PMID35943743
PMCPMC9364130
OpenAlexW4290794382

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.