Electroacupuncture at Houxi (SI 3) for acute lumbar sprain: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Abstract

Wang Y, Sun YJ, Wu YC, et al. Electroacupuncture at Houxi (SI 3) for acute lumbar sprain: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Acupunct Tuina Sci, 2015, 13 (5): 332-338 Abstract Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of electroacupuncture (EA) at Houxi (SI 3) in treating acute lumbar sprain. Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving EA at Houxi (SI 3) for acute lumbar sprain were retrieved from Results: A total of 6 trials involving 1 288 patients were eligible. Meta-analysis showed that the total effectiveness rate in the EA group was significantly different when compared with Nimesulide [RR＝1.33; 95% CI (1.19 to 1.49)] and Mobic [RR＝ 1.08; 95% CI (1.03 to 1.14)], but similar to that of acupuncture at Yaotongdian (EX-UE 7) [RR＝71.09; 95% CI (1.00 to 1.19)] and Diclofenac Sodium [RR＝1.08; (95% CI 0.96 to 1.21)]. The recovery rate in the EA group was significantly different when compared with Mobic [RR＝1.67; (95% CI 1.45 to 1.92)] and Nimesulid [RR＝1.37; (95% CI 1.15 to 1.62)], but similar to that of acupuncture at Yaotongdian [(RR＝1.35; 95% CI 0.99 to 1.84)] and Diclofenac Sodium [(RR＝1.19; 95% CI 0.88 to 1.61)]. Conclusion: Up to the search date, there are few high quality RCTs to evaluate the clinical efficacy of EA at Houxi (SI 3) for acute lumbar sprain, especially studies in English. Yet EA at Houxi (SI 3) still appeared to be an efficacious method for acute lumbar sprain, despite several inherent defects of the included studies. Further large scale trials are required to define the role of EA at Houxi (SI 3) in the treatment of this disease. 95% CI (1.19-1.49)]和莫比可药物组[RR＝1.08; 95% CI (1.03-1.14)]，但与针刺腰痛点组[RR ＝1.09; 95% CI (1.00-1.19)]和双氯芬酸钠组[RR＝1.08；95% CI (0.96-1.21)]疗效比较差异无统计学意义。而在治愈率 方面, 电针后溪穴组优于莫比可组[RR＝1.67; 95% CI (1.45-1.92)]和尼美舒利组[RR＝1.37; 95% CI (1.15-1.62)],与针 刺腰痛点组[RR＝1.35; 95% CI (0.99-1.84)]和双氯芬酸钠药物组[(RR＝1.19; 95% CI (0.88-1.61)]疗效差异无统计学意