| Literature DB >> 18227910 |
Kazunori Itoh1, Hiroshi Kitakoji.
Abstract
Many Japanese reports of acupuncture and moxibustion for chronic pain are not listed in medical databases such as Medline. Therefore, they are not easily accessible to researchers outside of Japan. To complement existing reviews of acupuncture and moxibustion for chronic pain and to provide more detailed discussion and analysis, we did a literature search using 'Igaku Chuo Zasshi Wed' (Japana Centra Revuo Medicina) and 'Citation Information by National Institute of Information' covering the period 1978-2006. Original articles and case reports of acupuncture and moxibustion treatment of chronic pain were included. Animal studies, surveys, and news articles were excluded. Two independent reviewers extracted data from located articles in a pre-defined structured way, and assessed the likelihood of causality in each case. We located 57 papers written in Japanese (20 full papers, 37 case reports). Conditions examined were headache (12 trials), chronic low back pain (9 trials), rheumatoid arthritis (8 trials), temporomandibular dysfunction (8 trials), katakori (8 trials) and others (12 trials). While 23 were described as clinical control trials (CCTs), 11 employed a quasi-random method. Applying the 5-point Jadad quality assessment scoring system, the mean score was 1.5 +/- 1.3 (SD). Eleven (52%) of the CCTs were conducted to determine a more effective procedure for acupuncture; these compared a certain type of acupuncture with another type of acupuncture or specific additional points. In particular, the trigger point acupuncture was widely used to treat chronic low back pain in Japan. Many reports of chronic pain treatment by acupuncture and moxibustion are listed in Japanese databases. From the data, we conclude that there is limited evidence that acupuncture is more effective than no treatment, and inconclusive evidence that trigger point acupuncture is more effective than placebo, sham acupuncture or standard care.Entities:
Keywords: Japanese literature; acupuncture; chronic pain; clinical trials; trigger point
Year: 2007 PMID: 18227910 PMCID: PMC2176146 DOI: 10.1093/ecam/nel092
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Figure 1.Published articles by years regarding acupuncture treatment of chronic pain in the Japanese literature
Summary of case reports on acupuncture and moxibustion in the Japanese literature
| S. no. | Authors | Years | Diagnosis | Intervention (methods) | No. of treatment | Outcome measures | Result | Reference nos | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ishizaki and Yano | 2005 | Chronic pain (polymyalgia rheumatic) | 1 | Acupuncture point (EA) | 6 | FS, PPT | + | ( |
| 2 | Kitade | 1998 | Chronic pain | 2 | Ryodoraku | 10–30 | Progress | + | ( |
| 3 | Kawachi and Kamei | 2006 | Chronic low back pain | 1 | TCM (moxibustion in box) | 48 | VAS | + | ( |
| 4 | Itoh | 2003 | Chronic low back pain | 1 | Trigger point acupuncture | 6 | VAS, PDAS, JOA | + | ( |
| 5 | Matsumoto | 2004 | Chronic neck pain | 1 | TCM (intradermal needle) | 4 | Progress | + | ( |
| 6 | Shinohara | 2004 | Chronic neck pain | 1 | Muscle meridians (intradermal needle) | 4 | VAS | + | ( |
| 7 | Seki | 2004 | Chronic neck pain | 1 | Muscle meridians (intradermal needle) | 1 | Progress | + | ( |
| 8 | Okumura | 2004 | Chronic neck pain | 1 | TCM | 1 | Progress | + | ( |
| 9 | Terasawa | 2005 | Chronic shoulder pain | 1 | Muscle meridians (intradermal needle) | 2 | Pain scale, ROM | + | ( |
| 10 | Yazu | 2004 | RA | 2 | TCM | I year | + | ( | |
| 11 | Hosoe | 2004 | RA | 1 | TCM | 13 | Progress | + | ( |
| 12 | Omata | 2002 | RA | 49 | TCM | 1–203 (29.7±40.3) | Progress | + | ( |
| 13 | Yukimachi | 2002 | Chronic headache | 3 | Acupuncture point (EA) | Progress | + | ( | |
| 14 | Suzuki | 2002 | Chronic headache | 3 | Acupuncture point (retaining needle) | Progress | + | ( | |
| 15 | Yoshizaki | 2002 | Chronic headache | 1 | Acupuncture point (retaining needle) | 4 | TCM | + | ( |
| 16 | Wang | 2000 | Chronic headache | 1 | TCM | 17 | VAS | + | ( |
| 17 | Kinoshita | 1987 | Chronic headache | 1 | Acupuncture point (retaining needle) | 49 | Progress | + | ( |
| 18 | Yamaguchi | 1987 | Chronic headache | 22 | Acupuncture point (retaining needle) | Category | + | ( | |
| 19 | Kinoshita | 1986 | Chronic headache | 1 | Acupuncture point (retaining needle) | 11 | Progress | + | ( |
| 20 | Manabe | 1999 | Chronic headache | 1 | Acupuncture point (moxa needle) | 24 | Category | + | ( |
| 21 | Manabe | 1999 | Chronic headache | 1 | Acupuncture point (retaining needle) | 24 | Category | + | ( |
| 22 | Imai | 2006 | TMJ | 1 | Acupuncture point (retaining needle) | 6 | VAS, mouth opening | + | ( |
| 23 | Mizumuma | 2004 | TMJ | 1 | Muscle meridians (intradermal needle) | 1 | Progress | + | ( |
| 24 | Imai | 2003 | TMJ | 1 | Acupuncture point (retaining needle) | 6 | VAS, Helkimo | + | ( |
| 25 | Ozaki | 2003 | TMJ | 1 | Acupuncture point (retaining needle) | 68 | Mouth opening | + | ( |
| 26 | Ajisaka | 2003 | TMJ | 26 | Acupuncture point (retaining needle) | Category | + | ( | |
| 27 | Ozaki | 2000 | TMJ | 1 | Acupuncture point (retaining needle) | 30 | Mouth opening | + | ( |
| 28 | Ozaki | 1995 | TMJ | 3 | Acupuncture point (retaining needle) | 19 | Mouth opening | + | ( |
| 29 | Kono | 1990 | TMJ | 1 | Acupuncture point (retaining needle) | 19 | Progress | + | ( |
| 30 | Tanabe | 1986 | TMJ | 12 | Acupuncture point (EA) | Category | + | ( | |
| 31 | Kurobe | 1999 | Katakori | 1 | Meridian treatment | 3 | Progress | + | ( |
| 32 | Hori | 1997 | Katakori | 2 | Muscle | 5–8 | Progress | + | ( |
| 33 | Mori | 1986 | Katakori | 1 | Tender point | 45 | Progress | + | ( |
| 34 | Hoshino and Kinoshita | 2004 | Katakori | 1 | TCM | 63 | Progress | + | ( |
EA, electroacupuncture; TCM, traditional Chinese medicine; VAS, visual analog scale; FS, face scale; PPT, pressure pain thresholds; PDAS, pain disability assessment scale; JOA, Japanese Orthopaedic Association Score; ROM, range of motion. Acupuncture point, there is no description on concept of treatment; +, positive.
Figure 2.The number of case reports regarding acupuncture treatment of chronic pain in the Japanese literature.
Summary of controlled clinical trials on acupuncture and moxibustion in the Japanese literature
| S. no. | Author | years | Diagnosis | Design | Intervention (methods) | Control | No. of treatment | Outcome measures | Result | Jadad score | Reference nos | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Itok | 2003 | Chronic low back pain | Crossover | 3 | A: trigger point | B: v (acupuncture point) | 6 | VAS, PDAS | A>B | 1 | ( |
| 2 | Hirota | 2006 | Chronic low back pain | Parallel | 9 | A: trigger point | B: v (tender point) | 5 | VAS, RDQ | A>B | 3 | ( |
| 3 | Itoh and Katsumi | 2005 | Chronic low back pain | RCT | 44 | A: trigger point | B: v (acupuncture point), C: ii (placebo) | 3 | VAS, RDQ | A>B>C | 4 | ( |
| 4 | Itoh | 2005 | Chronic low back pain | Crossover | 8 | A: trigger point | B: v (acupuncture point) | 6 | VAS, JOA | A>B | 1 | ( |
| 5 | Katsumi | 2004 | Chronic low back pain | RCT, crossover | 9 | A: trigger point | B: ii (placebo) | 6 | VAS, RDQ | A>B | 4 | ( |
| 6 | Itoh | 2004 | Chronic low back pain | RCT | 18 | A: trigger point | B: v (acupuncture point) | 6 | VAS, RDQ | A>B | 2 | ( |
| 7 | Itoh | 2004 | Chronic low back pain | Crossover | 4 | A: acupuncture point (EA) | B: v (retaining needle) | 10 | VAS, PDAS | A>B | 1 | ( |
| 8 | Yamamoto | 2003 | RA | Parallel | 170 | A: drug + acupuncture point | B: iv (drug) | I year | AIMS-2, ACR | A>B | 0 | ( |
| 9 | Kitsukawa | 2002 | RA | Parallel | 49 | A: drug + acupuncture point (moxibustion) | B: iv (drug) | 6 | VAS, mHAQ | A>B | 1 | ( |
| 11 | Kasuya | 2002 | RA | Parallel | 20 | A: drug + acupuncture point | B: iv (drug) | I year | VAS, AIMS-2, ACR | A>B | 0 | ( |
| 12 | Kasuya and Etoh | 2004 | RA | Parallel | 178 | A: drug + acupuncture point | B: iv (drug) | I year | VAS, AIMS-2, ACR | A>B | 1 | ( |
| 13 | Kasuya | 2004 | RA | Parallel | 170 | A: drug + acupuncture point | B: iv (drug) | I year | VAS, AIMS-2, ACR | A>B | 1 | ( |
| 14 | Furuya | 2002 | Katakori | RCT | 53 | A: tender point (intradermal needle) | B: ii (placebo) | 1 | VAS | A>B | 4 | ( |
| 15 | Nabeta | 1997 | Katakori | Parallel | 32 | A: acupuncture point | B: iii (sham) | 3 | VAS | A>B | 3 | ( |
| 16 | Kitade | 1995 | Katakori | Parallel | 59 | A: acupuncture point | B: iv (nerve block) | 3 month | Category | A>B | 0 | ( |
| 17 | Itoh | 2006 | Katakori | Parallel | 30 | A: trigger point | B: v (acupuncture point), C: ii (placebo) | 4 | VAS | A>B=C | 3 | ( |
| 18 | Yamaguchi | 1987 | Chronic headache | Parallel | 10 | A: acupuncture point | B: i (volunteers) | 10 | Pulse waves | A>B | 1 | ( |
| 19 | Yamaguchi | 1987 | Chronic headache | Parallel | 16 | A: acupuncture point | B: i (volunteers) | 10 | EMG | A>B | 1 | ( |
| 20 | Mustura | 1976 | Chronic headache | Parallel | 12 | A: honchiho | B: v (honchiho + hyouchiho) | 7 | Category | A=B | 0 | ( |
| 21 | Kitade and Hyodo | 1994 | Chronic pain | Parallel | 1247 | A: acupuncture point | B: iv (nerve block), C: iv (acupuncture and block) | Category | A<B<C | 0 | ( | |
| 22 | Itoh | 2003 | Fibromyalgia | Crossover | 1 | A: acupuncture point (EA) | B: v (TCM) | 14 | VAS, PPT | A>B | 1 | ( |
| 23 | Itoh | 2004 | Fibromyalgia | Crossover | 4 | A: acupuncture point (EA) | B: v (TCM) | 11 | VAS, PDAS | A>B | 1 | ( |
| 24 | Itoh | 2005 | Fibromyalgia | Crossover | 1 | A: TMC | B: v (tender point) | 5 | VAS, PPT | A>B | 1 | ( |
RCT, randomized controlled trials; EA, electroacupuncture; TCM, traditional Chinese medicine; VAS, visual analog scale; PDAS, pain disability assessment scale; RDQ, Roland–Morris disability questionnaire; AIMS-2, Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales Version2; ACR, American College of Rheumatology core set variables; mHAQ, modified Health Assessment Questionnaire; PPT, pressure pain thresholds (i) waiting lists; (ii) physiologically inert controls, e.g. sham TENS, sugar pills, placebo acupuncture; (iii) sham acupuncture; (iv) standard medical care, e.g. drug therapy or physiotherapy; (v) other acupuncture method. Hyouchiho refers to local or symptomatic treatment and honchiho to causal or essential treatment. Acupuncture point, there is no description on concept of treatment.
Figure 3.The number of controlled trials regarding acupuncture treatment of chronic pain in the Japanese literature.
Figure 4.The number of control groups for acupuncture treatment of chronic pain in the Japanese literature control groups were classified into one of five categories as follows: (i) waiting lists; (ii) physiologically inert controls, e.g. sham TENS, sugar pills, placebo acupuncture; (iii) sham acupuncture; (iv) standard medical care, e.g. drug therapy or physiotherapy and (v) other acupuncture method.
Figure 5.The distributions of Jadad score for studies of acupuncture treatment for chronic pain in the Japanese literature. The 5-point Jadad quality assessment score is suited to assess internal validity of a trial and this simple method has already been validated. 0 is low quality, 5 is high quality. Mean Jadad score for studies of acupuncture treatment for chronic pain reported in the Japanese literature was 1.5 ± 1.3.