| Literature DB >> 21189142 |
Norbert Salih1, Petra I Bäumler, Michael Simang, Dominik Irnich.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Deqi is defined in relation to acupuncture needling as a sensory perception of varying character. In a recently published sham laser validation study, we found that subjects in the verum and the sham laser group experienced deqi sensations. Therefore, we aim to further analyze whether the perceptions reported in the two study arms were distinguishable and whether expectancy effects exhibited considerable impact on our results.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2010 PMID: 21189142 PMCID: PMC3022896 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6882-10-81
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Complement Altern Med ISSN: 1472-6882 Impact factor: 3.659
Figure 1Sham laser device. In the device used during sham laser acupuncture, laser irradiation was deactivated by the manufacturer (Seirin, 3B Scientific GmbH, Hamburg, Germany). The visual (red light, approximately 587 nm) and acoustic functions were maintained and therefore double-blinding was achieved.
Comparison of the verum and the sham laser group, first and second treatment day and impact of expectancy effects due to acupuncture experience and belief in laser acupuncture
| Occurrence of deqii) | Intensity of deqiii) (± SD) | Laser assumed to be activeiii) | Correct identificationsiii) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 47/102 | 2.34 ± 2.34 | 12/34 | 12/34 | |
| 50/102 | 2.49 ± 2.36 | 15/34 | 17/34 | |
| 0.67 | 0.71 | 0.45 | 0.21 | |
| 55/102 | 2.39 ± 2.45 | 17/34 | 15/34 | |
| 42/102 | 2.46 ± 2.22 | 10/34 | 14/34 | |
| 0.07 | 0.69 | 0.18 | 0.84 | |
| 53/102 | 3.24 ± 2.65 | 14/34 | 12/34 | |
| 44/102 | 1.43 ± 1.37 | 13/34 | 17/34 | |
| 0.21 | 0.0002 | 0.97 | 0.14 | |
| 44 | 2.23 ± 1.80 | 13/28 | 12/28 | |
| 53/120 | 2.57 ± 2.72 | 14/40 | 17/40 | |
| 0.25 | 0.72 | 0.30 | 0.91 | |
Statistical analysis was performed by using the chi-square-test according to Pearson for occurrence of deqi sensations, for how often the laser device was assumed to be active and for the number of correct identifications. The Mann-Whitney-U test was used to compare the intensity of deqi sensations (evaluated by VAS). Subjects were treated at two treatment sessions at three different acupuncture points. Therefore, occurrence of deqi sensations is depicted relative to the number of point treatments calculated as n times six. Subjects were asked whether they considered the laser device active or inactive after each treatment session, hence correct identifications and the estimations that the laser was active apply to the total number of treatments calculated as n times 2.
Comparison between the two study arms regarding occurrence and intensity of perceived sensations at the three different acupuncture points
| Occurrence of deqi | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| LI4 | LU7 | LR3 | |
| 14 | 18 | 15 | |
| 11 | 24 | 15 | |
| 0.151 | 0.268 | 0.607 | |
| 2.21 ± 2.15 | 2.67 ± 2.39 | 2.08 ± 2.57 | |
| 2.67 ± 2.37 | 2.26 ± 1.99 | 2.73 ± 2.96 | |
| 0.61 | 0.55 | 0.76 | |
Statistical analysis was performed by using the chi-square-test according to Pearson for occurrence of deqi sensations and by the Mann-Whitney-U test for the intensity of these perceptions (evaluated by VAS, 0-10).
Figure 2Comparison of frequencies with which adjectives were used to describe perceptions during acupuncture treatment with the verum laser and the sham laser. Relative frequencies were calculated upon the number of subjects reporting perceptions within each study arm (verum laser group n = 47, sham laser group n = 50). We included errors bars representing the 95% confidence interval for this binary distribution. For more details on data refer to Table three.
Absolute frequency of adjective used to describe perceptions during the acupuncture treatments
| verum laser (n = 47) | sham laser (n = 50) | p-values | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 26 | 24 | 0.47 | |
| 23 | 24 | 0.93 | |
| 20 | 23 | 0.98 | |
| 16 | 16 | 0.83 | |
| 16 | 11 | 0.19 | |
| 16 | 21 | 0.73 | |
| 12 | 21 | 0.32 | |
| 12 | 7 | 0.15 | |
| 9 | 15 | 0.46 | |
| 6 | 6 | - | |
| 5 | 5 | - | |
| 4 | 1 | - | |
| 4 | 2 | - | |
| 3 | 5 | - | |
| 3 | 3 | - | |
| 3 | 3 | - | |
| 2 | 3 | - | |
| 2 | 1 | - | |
| 1 | 8 | - | |
| 1 | 9 | - | |
| 1 | 0 | - | |
| 0 | 1 | - |
Relative frequencies were calculated upon the number of subjects reporting perceptions within each study arm (verum laser group n = 47, sham laser group n = 50). Statistical comparison by chi-square-test according to Pearson did not reveal significant differences between the two study groups (p-values between 0.15 - 0.98).