ReviewIntegrative medicine research2024
Effectiveness and safety of acupuncture for carpal tunnel syndrome: An overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
Review in Integrative medicine research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Several systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) have explored the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome (CTS), but findings are inconsistent and vary in quality. Therefore, this overview aims to evaluate these SRs and MAs critically, synthesizing existing evidence on acupuncture in treating CTS. Methods: We searched 7 databases from their inception to April 25, 2024, using the keywords "acupuncture", "carpal tunnel syndrome", and "systematic review". Methodology and reporting quality were assessed using AMSTAR 2 and PRISMA. The risk of bias was evaluated using ROBIS, and evidence certainty was appraised using GRADE. Results: 9 related SRs/MAs were included, with 8 judged as critically low quality and 1 rated as low quality by AMSTAR 2. According to the PRISMA checklist, while 7 SR/MAs were found to adequately report over 70 %, none reported all items. The ROBIS assessment rated 4 SRs/MAs with a low risk of bias and 5 with a high risk. The quality of evidence evaluated by GRADE was low or very low. Descriptive analyses indicated that acupuncture could effectively reduce pain intensity, but evidence on responder rate, symptom severity, functional status, and electrophysiological parameters was inconsistent. No serious adverse events associated with acupuncture were found. Conclusions: Acupuncture might be beneficial for CTS. However, given the existing evidence limitations, the efficacy of acupuncture for CTS requires confirmation through further high-quality research. Protocol registration: PROSPERO (CRD42023409659).
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.