ReviewJournal of pain research2025
Efficacy and Safety of Fu's Subcutaneous Needling in the Treatment of Cervical Spondylosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Based on Randomized Controlled Trials.
Review in Journal of pain research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Spondylosis (CS) is a prevalent condition that significantly impacts quality of life and overall health. Fu's subcutaneous needling, a novel acupuncture technique, has been widely used to treat CS. This study employs a meta-analysis to comprehensively evaluate the efficacy of Fu's subcutaneous needling in treating CS. Methods: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), China Science Periodical Database (CSPD), Chinese Citation Database (CCD), and Chinese biomedical literature service system (CBM) databases for clinical trials on Fu's subcutaneous needling for CS, from inception to March 1, 2025. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews, and meta-analysis was performed using Stata 16.0. Results: A total of 46 studies involving 3767 cases were included. The results showed that the Fu's subcutaneous needling group had a higher effective rate than the control group (RR: 1.17, 95% CI: 1.14-1.20, p < 0.05). The Fu's subcutaneous needling group also had lower Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores (WMD: -1.55, 95% CI: -1.98 to -1.12, p < 0.05), lower Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire (NPQ) scores (WMD: -2.65, 95% CI: -5.27 to -0.03, p < 0.05), and lower Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores (WMD: -3.40, 95% CI: -6.59 to -0.21, p < 0.05) compared to the control group. The Fu's subcutaneous needling group also demonstrated higher safety (RR: 0.32, 95% CI: 0.13-0.75, p < 0.05). Subgroup analysis indicated that Fu's subcutaneous needling was effective across various subtypes of CS and showed significant advantages over other treatment modalities. The Efficacy of Fu's subcutaneous needling improved with longer treatment durations. Conclusion: Fu's subcutaneous needling is effective and safe for treating CS. Due to the limited number of included studies, further research is needed to confirm these findings.
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.