The effects of combined acupuncture anesthesia in gastrectomy
Zhen ci yan jiu = Acupuncture research / [Zhongguo yi xue ke xue yuan Yi xue qing bao yan jiu suo bian ji] 02/1985; 10(3):161-4.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The aim of this systematic review is to assess the effectiveness of acupuncture as an adjunctive analgesic method to standard anaesthetic procedures for surgery and to determine whether acupuncture has any analgesic-sparing effect. Electronic literature searches for randomised clinical trials (RCTs) of acupuncture during surgery were performed in seven electronic databases. No language restrictions were imposed. All included studies were rated according to their methodological quality and validity. As the studies were clinically heterogeneous, no meta-analyses were performed. The evidence was classified according to four levels: strong, moderate, limited, or inconclusive. Nineteen RCTs were identified. Seven of them suggested that acupuncture is efficacious. Of nine high-quality RCTs, two studies had positive outcomes. There was no significant association between study quality and direction of outcome. One of eight high-validity trials reported a positive outcome and there was a significant relationship between validity and direction of outcome. The evidence that acupuncture is more effective than no acupuncture as an adjunct to standard anaesthetic procedures is therefore inconclusive. Strong evidence exists that real acupuncture is not significantly different from placebo acupuncture. For an analgesic-sparing effect of acupuncture, evidence remains inconclusive. In conclusion, this review does not support the use of acupuncture as an adjunct to standard anaesthetic procedures during surgery.Pain 05/2005; 114(3):511-7. DOI:10.1016/j.pain.2005.02.011 · 5.21 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To investigate whether the methodological quality is influenced by language of publication in reports of randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials of physiotherapy interventions. Bibliometric and methodological quality data from all reports of trials indexed on the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) up to February 2011 were extracted. Descriptive statistics on the total PEDro score and the 11 individual PEDro items were calculated for each language of publication and for all non-English-language reports combined. Regression models were calculated to predict the total PEDro score and the presence of each of the 11 items of the PEDro scale using the language of publication as an independent variable. A total of 13,392 reports of trials were used for this study, 12,532 trials published in English and 860 published in other languages. Overall methodological quality was better for English reports than reports written in other languages (β=0.15, 95% confidence interval=0.04, 0.25). Specifically, reporting was better for items relating to random allocation, concealed allocation, and blinding of assessors, worse for more than 85% follow-up and intention-to-treat analysis, and no different for eligibility criteria and source specified, baseline comparability, blinding of subjects and therapists, reporting of between-group statistical comparisons, and reporting of point measures and measures of variability. Language of publication is associated with the methodological quality of reports of physiotherapy trials. Although English reports are more likely to have better methodological quality than reports written in other languages, the magnitude of this influence is small.Journal of clinical epidemiology 01/2013; 66(1):78-84. DOI:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.08.004 · 3.42 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.