ReviewCureus2024
Efficacy of Electroacupuncture Compared to Standard and Manual Needling Therapy for Nonspecific Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comorbidity Mechanism and Management of Chronic Low Back Pain and Major Depressive Disorder: From Neural Circuit Remodeling to Precision Medicine.Brain and behavior · 2026Review
- A Comparison Between Physical Methods Based on Mechanical Action and Pharmacotherapy in the Treatment of Discogenic Low Back Pain.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nonspecific low back pain is prevalent, and electroacupuncture is one potential treatment option. However, a focused evaluation of previous experimental studies is lacking. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy of electroacupuncture for nonspecific low back pain in comparison to standard therapy and manual needling therapy. We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase up to December 1, 2023, for randomized controlled trials on electroacupuncture for nonspecific low back pain. Outcomes measured included the Visual Analog Scale and Numerical Rating Scale. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. 10 reports were included in the meta-analysis. Six studies used electroacpuncture with standard therapy compared to standard therapy alone. Four studies compared electroacupuncture with manual needling therapies. Compared to control groups, electroacupuncture with standard therapy resulted in a statistically significant large effect in reduction in pain (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.83, 95% CI -1.22; -0.43, P < 0.0001) Electroacupuncture did not produce a statistically significant result compared to manual needling therapies (SMD 0, 95% CI -0.71; 0.71, P = 1.0) In terms of long-term analgesic effects, electroacupuncture with standard therapy versus standard therapy yielded a statistically significant large effect in reduction in pain at one month (SMD -0.84, 95% CI -1.30 to -0.37, P = 0.0004) and small effect at two months (SMD -0.40, 95% CI -0.65 to -0.16, P = 0.001) after treatment completion. Limitations, including small numbers of included studies and participants, the difficulty of blinding, and clinical heterogeneity among studies, were found. The certainty of evidence for these comparisons remained very low, which highlights the need for more robust studies. Compared to standard therapy alone, electroacupuncture used with standard therapy produced greater pain reduction for nonspecific low back pain in immediate effects and one month and two months after treatment completion. The findings suggest that electroacpuncture may provide sustained pain relief for nonspecific low back pain when combined with standard therapy.
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.