No abstract

Background: Acupuncture is frequently advocated as an adjunct treatment during stroke rehabilitation. The aim of this review was to assess its effectiveness in this setting. Methods:We searched 25 databases and 12 major Korean traditional medicine journals from their inception to October 2009. We included randomized controlled trials, with no language restrictions, that compared the effects of acupuncture (with or without electrical stimulation) with sham acupuncture. We assessed the methodologic quality of the trials using the Cochrane risk-of-bias criteria and the PEDro (Physiotherapy Evidence Database) scale.Results: Ten of 664 potentially relevant studies met our inclusion criteria. For acute and subacute stages after stroke, we included seven trials. A meta-analysis of the five studies that assessed functionality did not show a significant difference in favour of acupuncture, with high heterogeneity. A post-hoc sensitivity analysis of three trials with low risk of bias did not show beneficial effects of acupuncture on activities of daily living at the end of the intervention period (n = 244; standard mean difference 0.07, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.18 to 0.32; I 2 = 0%) or after follow-up (n = 244; standard mean difference 0.10, 95% CI -0.15 to 0.35; I 2 = 0%). For the chronic stage after stroke, three trials tested effects of acupuncture on function according to the Modified Ashworth Scale; all failed to show favourable effects. Interpretation:Our meta-analyses of data from rigorous randomized sham-controlled trials did not show a positive effect of acupuncture as a treatment for functional recovery after stroke. Research Appendix 2, available at www.cmaj.ca /cgi /content /full /cmaj .091113 /DC1). We also searched our own files manually for relevant articles. Hard copies of all articles were obtained and read in full. No language restrictions were imposed. We included dissertations and abstracts, provided they contained sufficient detail for critical evaluation. Abstract

The objective of this review is to assess the clinical evidence for or against acupuncture as a treatment for Parkinson's disease (PD). We searched the literature using 17 databases from their inception to September 2007 (searched again 3rd January 2008), without language restrictions. We included all randomized clinical trials (RCTs) regardless of their design. Methodological quality was assessed using the Jadad score. Eleven RCTs met all inclusion criteria. Three RCTs assessed the effectiveness of acupuncture on Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) compared with placebo acupuncture. A meta-analysis of these studies showed no significant effect (n = 96, WMD, 5.7; 95% CI -2.8 to 14.2, P = 0.19, heterogeneity: tau(2) = 0, chi(2) = 0.97, P = 0.62, I(2) = 0%). Another six RCTs compared acupuncture plus conventional drugs on improvement of symptoms of PD with drugs only. A meta-analysis of two of these studies suggested a positive effect of scalp acupuncture (n = 106, RR, 1.46, 95% CI = 1.15 to 1.87, P = 0.002; heterogeneity: tau(2) = 0.00, chi(2) = 1.14, P = 0.29, I(2) = 12%). Two further RCTs tested acupuncture versus no treatment. The meta-analysis of these studies also suggested beneficial effects of acupuncture. The results of the latter two types of RCTs fail to adequately control for nonspecific effects. In conclusion, the evidence for the effectiveness of acupuncture for treating PD is not convincing. The number and quality of trials as well as their total sample size are too low to draw any firm conclusion. Further rigorous trials are warranted.

No abstract

ObjectivesThe aims of this study were to develop a sham cupping device and to validate its use as a placebo control for healthy volunteers. Methods A sham cupping device was developed by establishing a small hole to reduce the negative pressure after suction such that inner pressure could not be maintained in the cup. We enrolled 34 healthy participants to evaluate the validity of the sham cupping device as a placebo control. The participants were informed that they would receive either real or sham cupping and were asked which treatment they thought they had received. Other sensations and adverse events related to cupping therapy were investigated. Results 17 patients received real cupping therapy and 17 received sham cupping. The two groups felt similar sensations. There was a tendency for subjects to feel that real cupping created a stronger sensation than sham cupping (48.9±21.4 vs 33.3±20.3 on a 100mm visual analogue scale). There were only mild to moderate adverse events observed in both groups. Conclusion We developed a new sham cupping device that seems to provide a credible control for real cupping therapy by producing little or no negative pressure. This conclusion was supported by a pilot study, but more rigorous research is warranted regarding the use of this device.