| Literature DB >> 23935656 |
Rosa B Spaeth1, Stephanie Camhi, Javeria A Hashmi, Mark Vangel, Ajay D Wasan, Robert R Edwards, Randy L Gollub, Jian Kong.
Abstract
Deqi is one of the core concepts in acupuncture theory and encompasses a range of sensations. In this study, we used the MGH Acupuncture Sensation Scale (MASS) to measure and assess the reliability of the sensations evoked by acupuncture needle stimulation in a longitudinal clinical trial on knee osteoarthritis (OA) patients. The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) was used as the clinical outcome. Thirty OA patients were randomized into one of three groups (high dose, low dose, and sham acupuncture) for 4 weeks. We found that, compared with sham acupuncture, real acupuncture (combining high and low doses) produced significant improvement in knee pain (P = .025) and function in sport (P = .049). Intraclass correlation analysis showed that patients reliably rated 11 of the 12 acupuncture sensations listed on the MASS and that heaviness was rated most consistently. Overall perceived sensation (MASS Index) (P = .014), ratings of soreness (P = .002), and aching (P = .002) differed significantly across acupuncture groups. Compared to sham acupuncture, real acupuncture reliably evoked stronger deqi sensations and led to better clinical outcomes when measured in a chronic pain population. Our findings highlight the MASS as a useful tool for measuring deqi in acupuncture research.Entities:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23935656 PMCID: PMC3713327 DOI: 10.1155/2013/204259
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Figure 1Consort diagram indicating the number of patients enrolled, dropped, and completed, by group.
Figure 2Standardized acupuncture protocol. (a) Real and sham acupuncture points. Low-dose real acupuncture was applied on ST35 and Xiyan (extra point). High-dose acupuncture group was applied to four additional points: GB34, SP9, GB39, and SP6. Six sham acupuncture points were used for the sham acupuncture group. (b) Acupuncture stimulation paradigm for both real and placebo acupunctures, indicating the timeline of intermittent needle stimulation during each acupuncture treatment. Six 10-second periods of manual needle rotation (M) were separated by 30 seconds of rest. The manual stimulation series (M1–6) was repeated a total of 4 times, twice prior to administering the first MASS, and an additional 2 times prior to the second MASS.
Baseline characteristics.
| Mean ± SD | All | High dose | Low dose | Sham |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 30 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
| Gender | 13 Females | 2 Females | 7 Females | 4 Females |
| Age | 57.5 ± 8.3 | 60.1 ± 8.9 | 58.30 ± 8.6 | 54.1 ± 7.3 |
| Duration (treated knee, years)* | 10.5 ± 8.3 | 9.8 ± 7.4 | 5.7 ± 6.0 | 16.22 ± 8.3 |
| KOOS pain | 55.94 ± 14.10 | 58.61 ± 12.99 | 53.09 ± 9.39 | 56.11 ± 19.15 |
| KOOS symptoms | 52.98 ± 16.17 | 57.14 ± 19.12 | 48.21 ± 10.68 | 53.57 ± 17.82 |
| KOOS ADL | 63.58 ± 15.34 | 66.03 ± 11.83 | 61.18 ± 13.83 | 63.53 ± 20.34 |
| KOOS sport† | 29.48 ± 22.92 | 30.00 ± 18.11 | 31.16 ± 19.06 | 28.50 ± 30.92 |
| KOOS QOL | 38.75 ± 15.25 | 41.88 ± 16.94 | 38.13 ± 13.96 | 36.25 ± 15.81 |
Significant main effect of group (high versus low versus sham) indicated by *; †indicates N = 29 due to one missing KOOS subscale score (low-dose group).
Figure 3Changes in KOOS subscale scores from baseline to endpoint. Improvement in each of the 5 domains is indicated by a positive value. (a) The interaction between group (high versus low versus sham) and time (baseline versus endpoint) showed a trend for the KOOS pain subscale (F(2,27) = 2.709, P = .085) but not for either function in daily living (F(2,27) = 2.178, P = .133) or function in sport (F(2,26) = 2.047, P = .149). (b) The interaction between group (real versus sham) and time (baseline versus endpoint) was significant for the KOOS subscale scores for pain (F(1,28) = 5.596, P = .025), function in sport (F(1,27) = 4.252, P = .049), and quality of life (QOL) (F(1,28) = 4.682, P = .039).
Internal consistency of the 12-item MGH acupuncture sensation scale (MASS).
| Administration 1 | Administration 2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Treatment 1 | .891 | .909 |
| Treatment 2 | .948 | .963† |
| Treatment 3 | .913 | .856 |
| Treatment 4 | .868 | .880† |
| Treatment 5 | .893 | .907† |
| Treatment 6 | .875 | .878 |
All measures of the internal consistency of the MASS administered to 30 subjects are reported as Cronbach's alpha; N = 29 due to missing data set indicated by †.
Test-retest reliability of deqi sensations.
| All | High Dose | Low Dose | Sham | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Soreness | .889 (<.001) | .721 (.002) | .925 (<.001) | .688 (.004) |
| Aching | .913 (<.001) | .726 (.002) | .922 (<.001) | .777 (<.001) |
| Deep pressure | .903 (<.001) | .808 (<.001) | .943 (<.001) | .821 (<.001) |
| Heaviness | .928 (<.001) | .88 (<.001) | .926 (<.001) | .769 (<.001) |
| Fullness/distention | .921 (<.001) | .831 (<.001) | .943 (<.001) | .872 (<.001) |
| Tingling | .839 (<.001) | .848 (<.001) | .795 (<.001) | .81 (<.001) |
| Numbness | .861 (<.001) | .839 (<.001) | .837 (<.001) | .932 (<.001) |
| Sharp pain | .768 (<.001) | .486 (.069) | .812 (<.001) | .761 (.001) |
| Dull pain | .845 (<.001) | .583 (.026) | .874 (<.001) | .871 (<.001) |
| Warmth | .74 (<.001) | .664 (.007) | .661 (.008) | .894 (<.001) |
| Cold | .078 (.37) | .467 (.08) | −.052 (.493) | −.15 (.559) |
| Throbbing | .792 (<.001) | .774 (<.001) | .601 (.02) | .876 (<.001) |
| Other | .681 (<.001) | −.75 (.508) | .641 (.011) | .741 (.001) |
| Sum | .907 (<.001) | .792 (<.001) | .922 (<.001) | .901 (<.001) |
| Mass index | .907 (<.001) | .764 (.001) | .927 (<.001) | .902 (<.001) |
All test-retest reliability analyses reported as intraclass correlation coefficients (P value).
Comparison of intensity ratings and MASS Index across acupuncture treatment groups.
| All | High Dose | Low Dose | Sham | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Soreness* | 1.29 ± 1.21 | 1.69 ± .86 | 1.89 ± 1.47 | .28 ± .34 |
| Aching* | 1.09 ± 1.14 | 1.25 ± .8 | 1.83 ± 1.4 | .2 ± .3 |
| Deep pressure | 1.05 ± 1.13 | 1.1 ± .98 | 1.51 ± 1.53 | .55 ± .57 |
| Heaviness | .80 ± 1.12 | .67 ± .94 | 1.54 ± 1.42 | .2 ± .25 |
| Fullness/distention | .71 ± 1.04 | .68 ± .86 | 1.25 ± 1.42 | .18 ± .38 |
| Tingling | 1.21 ± 1 | 1.61 ± 1.21 | 1.26 ± 1 | .77 ± .64 |
| Numbness | .70 ± .87 | .82 ± .89 | .96 ± 1.01 | .33 ± .61 |
| Sharp pain | 1.43 ± 1.05 | 1.9 ± .84 | 1.63 ± 1.25 | .76 ± .71 |
| Dull pain | 1.35 ± 1.1 | 1.55 ± .78 | 1.85 ± 1.38 | .65 ± .73 |
| Warmth | .48 ± .59 | .4 ± .63 | .66 ± .54 | .38 ± .62 |
| Cold | .06 ± .15 | .06 ± .13 | .11 ± .22 | .02 ± .04 |
| Throbbing* | .63 ± .81 | 1.13 ± 1.1 | .63 ± .53 | .15 ± .32 |
| Other | .19 ± .34 | .08 ± .19 | .12 ± .19 | .37 ± .49 |
| Sum score* | 10.99 ± 9.3 | 12.95 ± 7.55 | 15.22 ± 11.9 | 4.82 ± 3.79 |
| MASS index* | 1.62 ± 1.13 | 1.96 ± .84 | 2.10 ± 1.38 | .80 ± .62 |
Values presented as mean ± standard deviation. Significant differences between acupuncture mode (real versus sham acupuncture) after correction for multiple comparisons indicated by ∗.
By sensation, the number of individuals in each group who reported the sensation at least once across a total of 6 treatment sessions (assessed twice per treatment).
| All | High dose | Low dose | Sham | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Soreness* | 25 | 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Aching* | 21 | 9 | 9 | 5 |
| Deep pressure | 27 | 9 | 10 | 8 |
| Heaviness | 20 | 7 | 7 | 6 |
| Fullness/distention* | 18 | 8 | 7 | 3 |
| Tingling | 26 | 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Numbness | 20 | 7 | 7 | 6 |
| Sharp pain | 28 | 10 | 10 | 8 |
| Dull pain | 28 | 10 | 10 | 8 |
| Warmth | 17 | 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Cold | 8 | 3 | 3 | 2 |
| Throbbing | 18 | 7 | 7 | 4 |
| Other | 11 | 2 | 4 | 5 |
Sensations with significantly different frequencies across groups (real versus sham acupuncture) are denoted with a ∗.
Results of principal component analysis.
| Variable | Factor 1 | Factor 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Heaviness | .90 | — |
| Fullness/distension | .87 | — |
| Dull pain | .81 | — |
| Cold | .81 | — |
| Deep pressure | .75 | .55 |
| Soreness | .75 | .40 |
| Aching | .75 | .55 |
| Numbness | .60 | .56 |
| Sharp pain | .54 | .71 |
| Warmth | .42 | .49 |
| Throbbing | — | .95 |
| Tingling | — | .85 |
Results of principal component analysis with acupuncture mode (real versus sham) included as an additional variable.
| Variables | Factor 1 | Factor 2 | Factor 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Heaviness | .90 | — | — |
| Fullness/distension | .88 | — | — |
| Deep pressure | .78 | .54 | — |
| Cold | .78 | — | — |
| Dull pain | .77 | — | — |
| Aching | .70 | .485 | .42 |
| Soreness | .66 | — | .56 |
| Numbness | .64 | .58 | — |
| Warmth | .52 | .60 | — |
| Sharp pain | .50 | .64 | — |
| Throbbing | — | .91 | — |
| Tingling | — | .80 | — |
| Acupuncture mode (real versus sham) | — | — | .81 |
Results of principal component analysis with the KOOS subscales included as additional variables.
| Pain | Symptom | ADL | Sport | QOL | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | |
| KOOS | — | .65 | — | — | .96 | — | — | −.84 | — | — | −.74 | — | .76 |
| Soreness | .81 | — | .76 | — | — | .78 | — | — | .80 | — | — | .83 | — |
| Aching | .87 | — | .76 | .53 | — | .76 | .54 | — | .76 | .54 | — | .86 | — |
| Deep pressure | .88 | — | .77 | .53 | — | .72 | .57 | — | .70 | .55 | — | .87 | — |
| Heaviness | .95 | — | .91 | — | — | .84 | — | — | .83 | — | — | .93 | — |
| Fullness distension | .93 | — | .88 | — | — | .81 | — | — | .79 | — | — | .91 | — |
| Tingling | .47 | .72 | — | .85 | — | — | .82 | — | — | .81 | — | .46 | .73 |
| Numbness | .76 | — | .62 | .55 | — | .54 | .57 | — | .53 | .56 | — | .78 | — |
| Sharp pain | .74 | .50 | .56 | .70 | — | .59 | .68 | — | .62 | .67 | — | .73 | .51 |
| Dull pain | .87 | — | .82 | — | — | .82 | — | — | .82 | — | — | .86 | — |
| Warmth | .59 | — | .45 | .47 | — | — | .55 | .52 | — | .54 | .69 | .56 | — |
| Cold | .73 | — | .81 | — | — | .87 | — | — | .88 | — | — | .75 | — |
| Throbbing | — | .84 | — | .95 | — | — | .94 | — | — | .92 | — | — | .86 |