ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Fu's subcutaneous needling approach versus electroacupuncture for knee osteoarthritis: protocol for comparative effectiveness and safety randomized controlled trial.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: With the aging of the population, knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a common chronic osteoarthritic disorder among middle-aged and elderly people. Fu's subcutaneous needling (FSN) and electroacupuncture (EA) are both effective means of treating KOA. FSN, with characterized by simple operation, quick effect, safety and green,is a modern acupuncture that integrates modern medicine with traditional acupuncture theory. Our team has demonstrated through clinical trials that FSN can effectively relieve pain and improve walking ability in patients with KOA. However, studies on the difference in clinical efficacy of FSN in treating KOA still lack clinical validation with large samples. The purpose of this study was to provide high-level clinical evidence for the clinical management of KOA by comparing the multicenter differences between FSN and EA in the treatment of this disease. Methods and analysis: This study is a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial to compare the efficacy and safety of FSN with EA in the treatment of KOA. This study intends to recruit 300 patients with osteoarthritis of the knee in 6 tertiary hospitals in China, including Shandong Provincial Third Hospital, Shandong University, etc. The group was randomly divided into FSN group and EA group according to 1: 1 ratio. The intervention time is 30 min, and the treatment was carried out three times a week for 4 weeks, and the long-term follow-up was carried out one month after the treatment. The primary outcome index was the response rate of knee symptom relief, and the secondary outcome indexes were the numerical assessment of knee pain (NRS), WOMAC osteoarthritis index, quality of life evaluation (SF-12), 6-min walk test and safety evaluation. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, ChiCTR2400080196.
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.