SynthesisFrontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland)2026
Efficacy of auriculotherapy in reducing pain: a comprehensive literature review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland), 2026. 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
Introduction: This review examines the efficacy of auriculotherapy in reducing pain across acute and chronic contexts, focusing on pain intensity scores, analgesic requirements, and safety profiles. Methods: A comprehensive, English-language literature search was conducted across PubMed, b-On, Web of Science, Scopus, and SciELO using Boolean combinations of terms related to auriculotherapy, chronic and acute pain, and randomized trials (searches first run March 2026, re-run June 2026). Eligibility was defined Results: Auriculotherapy significantly reduced acute postoperative pain, with meta-analyzed Visual Analog Scale (VAS) reductions of -0.44 (95% CI: -0.72 to -0.17) at 24 h and an analgesic-requirement standardized mean difference of -0.88 (95% CI: -1.29 to -0.46). For chronic back pain, standardized mean differences ranged from -0.65 to -0.85. In migraine, VAS decreased by -0.65 (95% CI: -0.86 to -0.43) with attack frequency reduced by an MD of -0.49 (95% CI: -0.59 to -0.40). Cancer pain studies reported 36% VAS reductions at 2 months. Adverse events were minimal, limited to mild local reactions in less than 5%-8% of cases, with no serious events reported. Discussion: Auriculotherapy demonstrates moderate, consistent efficacy across pain types, likely mediated through autonomic modulation and endorphin release via somatotopic ear projections. A dose-response pattern emerged, with multiple sessions (2-3 weekly over 4-8 weeks) yielding sustained effects. Stronger benefits were observed in orthopedic perioperative settings and with needle-retention protocols. It concludes that auriculotherapy is a safe, viable non-pharmacological adjunct for pain management, while calling for large, diverse, standardized RCTs with longer follow-up and objective biomarker measures to strengthen the evidence base. Because these findings derive from a narrative synthesis of a heterogeneous mix of primary trials, they should be interpreted as indicative rather than definitive, particularly given the diversity of study designs and predominantly Asian/perioperative populations represented.
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.