ReviewPain and therapy2023
Efficacy and Safety of Transcutaneous Electrical Acupoint Stimulation (TEAS) As An Analgesic Intervention for Labor Pain: A Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Review in Pain and therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interventions for the Management of Bladder Spasms in Adults with Indwelling Urinary Catheters: A Nursing Practice-Oriented Systematic Review.Investigacion y educacion en enfermeria · 2026Pooled it
- The efficacy and safety of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation for labor analgesia in the first stage of labor: a qualitative and quantitative analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Research hotspots and trends of acupoint and pain based on PubMed: a bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Pooled it
- Effects of Transcutaneous Electrical Acupoint Stimulation on the Incidence of Hypoxia in Elderly Patients Undergoing Painless Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Pain research & management · 2024Trial
- Comparison of continuous epidural analgesia, traditional combined spinal-epidural, and modified combined spinal-epidural for labor analgesia: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Effects of transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation on body temperature, hemodynamic responses, and recovery in patients undergoing open spinal surgery.American journal of translational research · 2026Article
- Cochrane reviews of acupuncture are dated, do not account for the specific effects of sham controls and likely underestimate the efficacy of acupuncture therapy.Integrative medicine research · 2025Review
- Article
- Efficacy of Transcutaneous Electrical Acupoint Stimulation on Modulating Upper Extremity Sympathetic Skin Response in Alleviating Cancer Survivors With Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study.Journal of pain research · 2025Article
- Effects of Transcutaneous Electrical Acustimulation on Patients with Fibromyalgia Syndrome: Study Protocol of a Randomized, Double-Blind, Sham-Controlled Trial.Journal of pain research · 2025Article
- Article
- Maternal Attitude and Knowledge Regarding Painless Labor: A Report from a Referral Hospital in Northern Iran.Anesthesiology and pain medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionEpidural analgesia (EA) is the most widely used intervention for the reduction of labor pain; however, it is contra-indicated for patients with spinal deformity or allergy to anesthetics and may be refused by parturients. As a noninvasive and nonnarcotic analgesic intervention, transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation (TEAS) has gained increasing attention in recent years. Therefore, we performed a network meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of TEAS and EA as measured by visual analog scale score, the failure rate of natural delivery, adverse events, and Apgar scores.
methodsRelevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from four electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL) and clinical trials.gov were searched from inception until September 4, 2022. A random effects model was used during analysis, and outcomes were evaluated as standard mean difference (SMD), odds ratio (OR), and 95% confidence intervals (CrI) using STATA (version SE15.0), R (version 3.6.1), and ADDIS (version 1.16.8) software.
resultsTen RCTs comprising 1214 parturients were identified by screening. Six RCTs compared TEAS and controls, three compared EA and controls, and one compared TEAS and EA. No heterogeneity was found within the four outcomes. There was no significant difference in any outcomes between interventions or control treatments in terms of SMD, OR, and CrI. Combined with the highest surface under the cumulative ranking curve score, TEAS demonstrated possible better effects in the aspects of analgesic efficacy and safety under certain circumstances.
conclusionsTEAS may be a potential alternative for parturients as a simple, noninvasive, and non-pharmacological intervention compared with EA in terms of analgesic efficacy and safety for mothers and neonates.
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.