| Literature DB >> 24159338 |
Jing Guo1, Lin-Peng Wang, Cun-Zhi Liu, Jie Zhang, Gui-Ling Wang, Jing-Hong Yi, Jin-Lian Cheng.
Abstract
Objectives. To investigate the six-week influence of acupuncture on sleep quality and daytime functioning in primary insomnia. Methods. The study was a double-dummy, single-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial. A total of 180 patients with primary insomnia were randomly assigned to 3 groups: verum group underwent verum acupuncture plus placebo; estazolam group underwent estazolam plus sham acupuncture; sham group underwent sham acupuncture plus placebo. The outcome was measured by Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), and the 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). Results. The three groups showed significant improvement compared with the pretreatment baseline. Compared with the other two groups, the verum group reported improved sleep quality (SQ) and vitality (VT), decreased daytime dysfunction (DD) and sleepiness (ESS score). The differences were kept from the treatment period to the end of the trial. Discussion. Verum acupuncture appeared to be more effective in increasing sleep quality and daytime functioning than sham acupuncture and estazolam. Trial Registration. The trial is registeded with ClinicalTrials.gov ISRCTN12585433.Entities:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24159338 PMCID: PMC3789397 DOI: 10.1155/2013/163850
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Figure 1Trial profile.
Demographic and clinical characteristics of the ITT population (Mean ± SD).
| Variables | Verum group ( | Estazolam Group ( | Sham Group ( |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, years | 47.5 ± 13.3 | 50.1 ± 15.6 | 49.2 ± 12.0 | 0.54 | 0.59 |
| Sex, male/female | 19/41 | 21/39 | 18/42 | 0.36 | 0.84 |
| Education attainment, y | 10.2 ± 3.5 | 9.7 ± 4.2 | 11.4 ± 3.7 | 0.42 | 0.25 |
| Insomnia duration, y | 6.3 ± 2.1 | 5.7 ± 3.9 | 6.2 ± 4.8 | 0.33 | 0.57 |
| Married | 40 | 39 | 42 | 0.45 | 0.98 |
| Widowed | 9 | 10 | 9 | ||
| Single/separated/divorced | 11 | 11 | 9 | ||
| Chronic medical illness | 7 | 4 | 9 | 2.14 | 0.34 |
| ESS | 8.4 ± 2.7 | 8.2 ± 2.1 | 8.9 ± 2.2 | 1.26 | 0.29 |
| PSQI total score | 11.5 ± 2.0 | 12.1 ± 1.8 | 11.9 ± 2.2 | 1.42 | 0.24 |
| SQ | 2.8 ± 0.7 | 2.6 ± 0.6 | 2.5 ± 0.8 | 2.30 | 0.10 |
| SOL (min) | 55.5 ± 10.9 | 59.0 ± 13.1 | 56.0 ± 13.1 | 1.39 | 0.25 |
| TST (min) | 285.0 ± 54.5 | 273.0 ± 62.7 | 263.0 ± 59.1 | 2.10 | 0.12 |
| SE (%) | 70.2 ± 10.8 | 73.5 ± 8.9 | 71.6 ± 10.6 | 1.57 | 0.21 |
| Dyssomnia | 1.4 ± 0.7 | 1.5 ± 0.9 | 1.5 ± 0.8 | 0.33 | 0.72 |
| DD | 2.2 ± 0.7 | 2.1 ± 0.7 | 2.1 ± 0.6 | 0.53 | 0.59 |
ITT: intention to treat. verum group: verum acupuncture + placebo; estazolam group: estazolam + sham acupuncture; sham group: sham acupuncture + placebo.
ESS: Epworth Sleepiness Scale; PSQI: Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index; SQ: sleep quality; SOL: sleep-onset latency; TST: total sleep time; SE: sleep efficiency; DD: daytime dysfunction; results from x 2 or ANOVA test for categorical and quantitative variables, respectively.
Change in SF-36 (Mean ± SD) from baseline to 2-month follow-up.
| Item timepoint | Verum group | Estazolam group | Sham group |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Verum versus sham | Verum versus estazolam | Estazolam versus sham | ||||
| PF | ||||||
| Baseline | 85.6 ± 10.8 | 88.1 ± 8.3 | 86.4 ± 10.4 | |||
| Week 6 | 88.4 ± 9.6 | 89.8 ± 6.4 | 87.7 ± 8.5 | 0.68 | 0.35 | 0.18 |
| 2-month follow-up | 89.8 ± 7.7 | 87.9 ± 8.3 | 86.6 ± 9.1 | 0.05 | 0.24 | 0.42 |
| RP | ||||||
| Baseline | 53.5 ± 10.0 | 55.1 ± 13.5 | 56.3 ± 10.9 | |||
| Week 6 | 63.1 ± 12.5* | 64.2 ± 13.4* | 59.7 ± 13.3 | 0.18 | 0.63 | 0.07 |
| 2-month follow-up | 61.4 ± 14.3* | 58.5 ± 16.7 | 57.2 ± 13.4 | 0.15 | 0.31 | 0.66 |
| BP | ||||||
| Baseline | 84.7 ± 12.9 | 87.1 ± 8.0 | 85.3 ± 10.0 | |||
| Week 6 | 87.0 ± 13.6 | 89.7 ± 10.1 | 86.6 ± 11.3 | 0.85 | 0.24 | 0.18 |
| 2-month follow-up | 86.3 ± 15.8 | 87.7 ± 13.8 | 83.5 ± 13.2 | 0.30 | 0.63 | 0.13 |
| GH | ||||||
| Baseline | 35.7 ± 10.1 | 36.1 ± 8.6 | 33.2 ± 6.9 | |||
| Week 6 | 38.0 ± 10.2 | 36.0 ± 10.9 | 34.7 ± 10.6 | 0.11 | 0.31 | 0.53 |
| 2-month follow-up | 36.6 ± 8.6 | 34.5 ± 10.7 | 33.8 ± 8.1 | 0.11 | 0.21 | 0.69 |
| VT | ||||||
| Baseline | 36.8 ± 9.4 | 33.6 ± 9.9 | 34.4 ± 7.1 | |||
| Week 6 | 44.6 ± 13.1* | 32.1 ± 10.1 | 37.7 ± 10.5 | 0.002 | <0.001 | 0.01 |
| 2-month follow-up | 42.3 ± 12.0* | 32.1 ± 8.5 | 35.4 ± 10.0 | 0.001 | <0.001 | 0.10 |
| SF | ||||||
| Baseline | 73.6 ± 12.0 | 75.6 ± 9.7 | 72.1 ± 10.4 | |||
| Week 6 | 81.6 ± 11.5* | 80.7 ± 17.0* | 74.4 ± 15.7 | 0.02 | 0.75 | 0.03 |
| 2-month follow-up | 76.3 ± 13.9 | 77.9 ± 15.6 | 73.0 ± 13.0 | 0.24 | 0.56 | 0.08 |
| RE | ||||||
| Baseline | 31.3 ± 7.7 | 33.4 ± 6.3 | 32.3 ± 9.0 | |||
| Week 6 | 37.4 ± 19.5* | 42.1 ± 16.5* | 33.8 ± 17.0* | 0.29 | 0.16 | 0.02 |
| 2-month follow-up | 38.0 ± 16.4* | 34.3 ± 14.3 | 31.8 ± 16.2 | 0.04 | 0.21 | 0.42 |
| MH | ||||||
| Baseline | 48.1 ± 19.0 | 41.1 ± 18.4 | 47.5 ± 13.2 | |||
| Week 6 | 52.2 ± 17.9 | 54.3 ± 20.8* | 48.6 ± 17.2 | 0.32 | 0.56 | 0.12 |
| 2-month follow-up | 50.0 ± 19.3 | 48.6 ± 19.9 | 44.7 ± 14.6 | 0.14 | 0.70 | 0.27 |
SF-36: 36-item short-form health survey; MH: mental health; PF: physical functioning; RP: role-physical; BP: bodily pain; VT: vitality; GH: general health; SF: social functioning; RE: role-emotional.
Data from multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) and repeated measures. (Mauchly's test of sphericity: P < 0.05.) *Comparison within each group with baseline P < 0.05.
Figure 2Change in Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index and subscale scores at different times. Using repeated measures and multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) process of the general linear model and giving comparison among different groups and different measure time pairwise. † P < 0.05, versus sham acupuncture group at the same time point. △ P < 0.05, versus estazolam group at the same time point.
Figure 3Change in Epworth Sleepiness Scale score from baseline to 2-month follow-up. Data from repeated measures and multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) process of the general linear model.
Figure 4De qi ratio. De qi ratio means the ratio of De qi points to total points in three groups.
Adverse events.
| Symptom | Number | Severity | Disposal | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Local hematoma | ||||
| Verum | 15 | Mild | Cold compress | Reablement |
| Estazolam | 18 | |||
| Sham | 11 | |||
| Headache | ||||
| Verum | 5 | Mild | Resting | Reablement |
| Estazolam | 10 | |||
| Sham | 12 | |||
| Dizziness | ||||
| Verum | 5 | Mild | Resting | Reablement |
| Estazolam | 7 | |||
| Sham | 6 | |||
| Muscle convulsion | ||||
| Verum | 2 | Mild | Massage | Reablement |
| Estazolam | 6 | |||
| Sham | 2 |