Effects of Acupuncture Treatment on Daily Life Activities and Quality of Life

Abstract

Background and Purpose-A number of studies have indicated that acupuncture might improve the functional recovery of stroke patients. These studies vary in inclusion criteria, sample size, and evaluation methods. The present study was designed to investigate whether electroacupuncture treatment favorably affects stroke patients' ability to perform daily life activities, their health-related quality of life, and their use of health care and social services. Methods-One hundred four consecutive patients Ͼ40 years of age admitted to hospital because of an acute stroke were randomized to 3 groups: deep, superficial, and no acupuncture treatment. The acupuncture treatment given by 4 physiotherapists started 4 to 10 days after randomization and was given twice a week for 10 weeks. All patients underwent conventional stroke rehabilitation as well. Two occupational therapists, blinded regarding the patients' allocation, evaluated the treatment effects. The assessments were performed 4 times during the first year after randomization by means of interviews and observations. Results-There were no differences between the groups with reference to changes in the neurological score and the Barthel and Sunnaas activities of daily living index scores after 3 and 12 months. Regarding the Nottingham Health Profile, the no acupuncture group had somewhat fewer mobility problems. No differences in health care and social services were found between the groups. Conclusions-The present study does not give support to the previous studies, which indicates that acupuncture treatment may have a beneficial effect on acute stroke patients' ability to perform daily life activities, their health-related quality of life, and their use of health care and social services. (Stroke. 1998;29:2100-2108.)

Evaluating the efficacy of acupuncture in defined aspects of stroke recovery

“…The BI result over 12 and 52 weeks was comparable ( ) n; Ac acupuncture; Pl placebo both with that expected from normal stroke rehabilitation and that observed in recent studies and systematic reviews [8,15,21,27,28]. This suggests that not only does acupuncture have no specific efficacy over placebo, as reported in our study, but it may also have no contextual or nonspecific benefits over conventional stroke management.…”

“…As one fifth of UK physiotherapists now use acupuncture [12], and many are directly involved in stroke rehabilitation, there is interest in evaluating this therapy. Many previous acupuncture and stroke trials have been of poor quality, including patients with Transient Ischaemic Attacks (TIAs) [8,16], or involving only manual acupuncture, [6] whereas elec-■ Abstract Objective To investigate the efficacy of acupuncture on stroke recovery compared to an inert placebo. Design Placebo-controlled, randomised, clinical trial.…”

The quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials of electroacupuncture for stroke

“…Six studies conducted follow-up assessment with duration from 6 weeks to 12 months. Four studies conducted sample size calculation [20, 23, 34, 63]. Twenty-one studies reported adverse effects.…”

“…In 11 studies, the discripion of the professional acupuncturists who participated in the studies was very simple and without detailed background. Nine studies reported informed consent from patients [20, 23, 24, 27, 33, 34, 64, 65, 71]. Only 6 study [27, 50, 62, 64, 65, 74] reported ethical approval.…”

Acupuncture Efficacy on Ischemic Stroke Recovery

“…[11][12][13] In the earlier trials conducted outside China, 2 studies showed that acupuncture can improve motor function and independence in activities of daily living (ADL), 14,15 whereas 2 trials using sham treatment as control did not find evidence of benefit. 16,17 Although, by contrast, many Chinese trials reported positive results, the conclusions were not regarded as robust, as a result of small sample size and methodological weaknesses as follows: the use of outcome measures that were not internationally recognized; unclear methods of randomization and allocation concealment; the lack of long-term follow-up; and publication bias.…”