Observations on the short-term and long term effects of point Houxi(SI 3) electroacupuncture on acute lumbar sprain

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the clinical efficacy of point Houxi(SI 3) electroacupuncture for treating acute lumbar sprain. Methods: Three hundred patients with acute lumbar sprain were randomly grouped with a random number table. The electroacupuncture group was treated by electro-acupuncture at point Houxi (SI 3) and the medication group, with meloxicam. Results: A comparison of the short-term effects showed that the efficacy rate was 97.3% in the electroacupuncture group and 89.3% in the medication group. The average rank of the short-term effect score was lower in the electroacupuncture group than in the medication group (P<0.01); there was a significant difference between the two groups. A comparison of the long-term effect showed that the efficacy rate was 99.3% in the electroacupuncture group and 93.2% in the medication group. The average rank of the long-term effect score was lower in the electroacupuncture group than in the medication group (P<0.01); there was a significant difference between the two groups. Conclusion: Both point Houxi (SI 3) electroacupuncture and meloxicam have a marked effect on acute lumbar sprain, but the short-term and long-term effects are better in the electroacupuncture group than in the medication group.

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

“…Ultimately, 6 studies including 1 288 patients were included for analysis (Table 1). [6][7][8] , other three were single-centered study [9][10][11] . All the trials were randomized controlledtrials (treatment and control).…”

“…Among the six trials, five trials claimed the methods of randomization clearly, and all of them used random number table [6][7][8][9][10] ; only one failed to describe how the random allocation sequences were generated legibly [9] . Allocated concealment was reported in 4 trials, such as opaque envelopes [6][7][8]9] . Two trials used single blinding method [6][7] .…”

“…Two trials used single blinding method [6][7] . Four trials reported missed cases, but did not use the intention-to-treat analysis (ITT) [6][7][8]11] . Only one trial had a follow-up report.…”

“…The treatment groups were all intervened by EA at Houxi (SI 3); while three trials adopted Mobic for control [7][8]11] , one trial used needling at Yaotongdian (EX-UE 7) for control [6] , one trial used Diclofenac Sodium in the control group [11] , and one adopted EA plus Nimesulid in the treatment group and Nimesulid alone in the control group [10] .…”

“…One trial of EA at Houxi (SI 3) plus Nimesulide versus Nimesulide [RR＝1.33; 95% CI (1.19 to 1.49)] showed a beneficial treatment effect that did not cross the line of no effect [10] . Furthermore, three trials of EA at Houxi (SI 3) versus Mobic [RR＝1.08; 95% CI (1.03 to 1.14)] showed a clinically significant effect that excluded clinically insignificant values [7][8][9] . At last, one trial of EA at Houxi (SI 3) versus point acupuncture at Yaotongdian (EX-UE 7) showed [RR=1.09; 95% CI (1.00 to 1.19)] [6] and one trial of EA at Houxi (SI 3) plus tuina manipulation versus Diclofenac Sodium showed [RR＝1.08; 95% CI (0.96 to 1.21)] that crossed the line of no effect, indicating clinically insignificant values [11] .…”