Talk to the Veterans Crisis Line now
U.S. flag
An official website of the United States government

Health Services Research & Development

Go to the ORD website
Go to the QUERI website

HSR&D Citation Abstract

Search | Search by Center | Search by Source | Keywords in Title

Identifying patients with chronic pain who respond to acupuncture: results from an individual patient data meta-analysis.

Foster NE, Vertosick EA, Lewith G, Linde K, MacPherson H, Sherman KJ, Witt CM, Vickers AJ, Acupuncture Trialists Collaboration. Identifying patients with chronic pain who respond to acupuncture: results from an individual patient data meta-analysis. Acupuncture in medicine : journal of the British Medical Acupuncture Society. 2021 Apr 1; 39(2):83-90.

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.
   Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions



Abstract:

BACKGROUND: In a recent individual patient data meta-analysis, acupuncture was found to be superior to sham and non-sham controls in patients with chronic pain. It has been suggested that a subgroup of patients has an exceptional response to acupuncture. We hypothesized the presence of exceptional acupuncture responders would lead to a different distribution of pain scores in acupuncture versus control groups, with the former being skewed to the right. METHODS: This individual patient data meta-analysis included 39 high-quality randomized trials of acupuncture for chronic headache, migraine, osteoarthritis, low back pain, neck pain and shoulder pain published before December 2015 (n? = 20,827). In all, 25 involved sham acupuncture controls (n? = 7097) and 25 non-acupuncture controls (n? = 16,041). We analyzed the distribution of change scores and calculated the difference in the skewness statistic-which assesses asymmetry in the data distribution-between acupuncture and either sham or non-acupuncture control groups. We then entered the difference in skewness along with standard error into a meta-analysis. FINDINGS: Control groups were more right-skewed than acupuncture groups, although this difference was very small. The difference in skew was 0.124 for non-acupuncture-controlled trials (p? = 0.047) and 0.141 for sham-controlled trials (p? = 0.029). In a pre-specified sensitivity analysis excluding three trials with outlying results known a priori, the difference in skew between acupuncture and sham was no longer statistically significant (p? = 0.2). CONCLUSION: We did not find evidence to support the notion that there are exceptional acupuncture responders. The challenge remains to identify features of chronic pain patients that can be used to distinguish those that have a good response to acupuncture treatment.





Questions about the HSR&D website? Email the Web Team.

Any health information on this website is strictly for informational purposes and is not intended as medical advice. It should not be used to diagnose or treat any condition.