Acupuncture Vs Placebo In The Common Migraine: A Double Blind Study

Ceccherelli, Francesco; Ambrosio, Francesco; Avila, M.S.; Duse, G; Munari, Andrea; Giron, Giampiero

doi:10.1177/03331024870070s6225

Cited by 11 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…All trials used parallel-group designs; there were no cross-over studies. Fifteen trials included a sham acupuncture control group (Alecrim 2005; Alecrim 2006; Alecrim 2008; Ceccherelli 1992; Diener 2006; Facco 2008; Li 2012; Linde K 2005; Linde M 2004; Vincent 1989; Wallasch 2012; Wang 2015; Weinschütz 1993; Weinschütz 1994; Zhao 2014), five a no-acupuncture control group (Facco 2008; Jena 2008; Linde K 2005; Linde M 2000; Vickers 2004), and five a comparator group receiving prophylactic drug treatment (Allais 2002; Diener 2006; Facco 2013; Hesse 1994; Streng 2006). Sixteen trials were performed in a single centre and six were multicentre trials.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Five trials (Allais 2002; Ceccherelli 1992; Li 2012; Wallasch 2012; Zhao 2014) standardized acupuncture treatments (all participants were treated at the same points); seven (Alecrim 2006; Diener 2006; Facco 2013; Linde K 2005; Linde M 2000; Linde M 2004; Wang 2015) semi-standardized treatments (either all participants were treated at some basic points and additional individualized points, or there were different predefined needling schemes depending on symptom patterns); and 10 trials individualized the selection of acupuncture points (Alecrim 2005; Alecrim 2008; Facco 2008; Hesse 1994; Jena 2008; Streng 2006; Vickers 2004; Vincent 1989; Weinschütz 1993; Weinschütz 1994). The number of treatment sessions was between six and 12 in 13 trials, and 16 or more in nine trials.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For two studies (Hesse 1994; Linde M 2004) both acupuncturists rating the study had 50% or less confidence that the acupuncture had adequate quality. For a further six studies (Ceccherelli 1992; Li 2012; Linde M 2000; Wallasch 2012; Weinschütz 1993; Weinschütz 1994) at least one acupuncturist gave a rating of 50% or lower. We could not assess four trials using individualized treatments not described in detail (Alecrim 2005; Alecrim 2008; Facco 2008; Jena 2008).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the second group placebo needles were placed at standardized points without the ’Chinese ritual’ (to investigate whether the different interaction and process affected outcomes). One study (Ceccherelli 1992) used a complex procedure without real needling. One study used a mix of superficial needling at non-acupuncture points and a non-penetrating technique (with a blunted cocktail stick) for points on the head (Wang 2015).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The risk of bias assessments of single trials are displayed in Figure 2; a summary across trials is presented in Figure 3. It should be noted that three trials rated unclear for the item ’incomplete follow-up outcome data’ actually did not include a follow-up (Ceccherelli 1992; Jena 2008; Zhao 2014). …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Acupuncture for the prevention of episodic migraine

Linde

Allais

Brinkhaus

et al. 2016

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

210

217

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Acupuncture for the prevention of episodic migraine

Linde

Allais

Brinkhaus

et al. 2016

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

210

217

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Differential Effectiveness of Placebo Treatments

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IMPORTANCE When analyzing results of randomized clinical trials, the treatment with the greatest specific effect compared with its placebo control is considered to be the most effective one. Although systematic variations of improvements in placebo control groups would have important implications for the interpretation of placebo-controlled trials, the knowledge base on the subject is weak. OBJECTIVE To investigate whether different types of placebo treatments are associated with different responses using the studies of migraine prophylaxis for this analysis. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS We searched relevant sources through February 2012 and contacted the authors to identify randomized clinical trials on the prophylaxis of migraine with an observation period of at least 8 weeks after randomization that compared an experimental treatment with a placebo control group. We calculated pooled random-effects estimates according to the type of placebo for the proportions of treatment response. We performed meta-regression analyses to identify sources of heterogeneity. In a network meta-analysis, direct and indirect comparisons within and across trials were combined. Additional analyses were performed for continuous outcomes. EXPOSURE Active migraine treatment and the placebo control conditions. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Proportion of treatment responders, defined as having an attack frequency reduction of at least 50%. Other available outcomes in order of preference included a reduction of 50% or greater in migraine days, the number of headache days, or headache score or a significant improvement as assessed by the patients or their physicians. RESULTS Of the 102 eligible trials, 23 could not be included in the meta-analyses owing to insufficient data. Sham acupuncture (proportion of responders, 0.38 [95% CI, 0.30-0.47]) and sham surgery (0.58 [0.37-0.77]) were associated with a more pronounced reduction of migraine frequency than oral pharmacological placebos (0.22 [0.17-0.28]) and were the only significant predictors of response in placebo groups in multivariable analyses (P = .005 and P = .001, respectively). Network meta-analysis confirmed that more patients reported response in sham acupuncture groups than in oral pharmacological placebo groups (odds ratio, 1.88 [95% CI, 1.30-2.72]). Corresponding analyses for continuous outcomes showed similar findings. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Sham acupuncture and sham surgery are associated with higher responder ratios than oral pharmacological placebos. Clinicians who treat patients with migraine should be aware that a relevant part of the overall effect they observe in practice might be due to nonspecific effects and that the size of such effects might differ between treatment modalities.

show abstract