ArticleChinese medicine2026
Effectiveness and safety of motion style acupuncture treatment for acute neck pain: a multicenter randomized controlled trial.
Article in Chinese medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04539184 (The Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness of Motion Style Acupuncture Treatment), which is not on this 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.
The Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness of Motion Style Acupuncture Treatment (MSAT) for Acute Neck Pain: A Multi-center Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Efficacy of Superficial Acupuncture Stimulation with Dynamic Mobilization in Chronic Neck Pain: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of pain research · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAcute neck pain is common and often resolves spontaneously; however, a substantial proportion of cases progress to chronicity, leading to long-term disability and socioeconomic burden. Effective interventions that facilitate rapid recovery during the acute phase remain limited. This study compared the effectiveness and safety of motion-style acupuncture treatment (MSAT) with conventional acupuncture in patients with acute neck pain.
methodsThis multicenter, randomized controlled trial was conducted across four Korean medicine hospitals. A total of 128 adults aged 19-70 years with acute neck pain (≤ 4 weeks) and visual analog scale (VAS) score ≥ 5 at rest or during movement were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive MSAT or conventional acupuncture 2-3 times weekly for 2 weeks. Randomization was performed using site-stratified permuted block sequences with variable block sizes, and outcome assessors were blinded to group allocation. The primary outcome was the change in neck pain during movement, measured by the visual analog scale (VAS), from baseline to Week 3. Analyses were conducted according to the intention-to-treat principle.
resultsMSAT resulted in significantly greater reductions in movement-related pain at Week 3 compared with acupuncture (between-group difference: 15.24 mm; 95% CI 9.43-21.05), with effects sustained through Week 9. MSAT also led to greater improvements in neck disability (Neck Disability Index difference at Week 3: 7.49; 95% CI 4.23-10.75) and health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L difference at Week 9: - 0.03; 95% CI - 0.06 to 0.00). Seven participants (5.5%; MSAT, n = 3; acupuncture, n = 4) were lost to follow-up or discontinued the intervention. Adverse events were mild and occurred at comparable rates between groups.
conclusionsMSAT, which integrates acupuncture with guided movement, was associated with more rapid pain relief and functional improvement than conventional acupuncture, without compromising safety. These fundings suggest that MSAT may be a clinically useful option to support early functional recovery in patients with acute neck pain. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT04539184).
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.