Steven E Harte1, Daniel J Clauw1, Vitaly Napadow2, Richard E Harris1. 1. Chronic Pain and Fatigue Research Center, Department of Anesthesiology, University of Michigan , Ann Arbor MI. 2. Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School , Boston, MA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clinical trials of acupuncture in chronic pain have largely failed to demonstrate efficacy of traditional over sham acupuncture. However, it should be noted that sham acupuncture is not inert. OBJECTIVE: To determine if experimental-pressure pain assessment and chemical neuroimaging can identify differential responsiveness to sham as opposed to traditional acupuncture. PATIENTS AND INTERVENTION: Fifty patients with fibromyalgia were randomized to either 9 traditional (TA) or sham (SA) acupuncture treatments over a period of 4 weeks. Both participants and assessors were blinded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measures were pressure-pain sensitivity at the thumbnail, insular glutamate+glutamine (Glx), and clinical pain. RESULTS:PATIENTS WITH LOW PAIN SENSITIVITY (LPS), BUT NOT WITH HIGH PAIN SENSITIVITY (HPS), HAD A SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED CLINICAL PAIN RESPONSE TO SA (CHANGE IN MEAN [STANDARD DEVIATION (SD)]: HPS -8.65 [7.91]; LPS -2.14 [6.68]; p=0.03). This relationship was not the case for TA (HPS -6.90 [4.51]; LPS -6.41 [9.25]; p=0.88). SA-treated patients who were more sensitive also had greater baseline levels of insular Glx than patients who were less sensitive (Glx mean [SD]: HPS 11.3 [1.18]; LPS 10.2 [0.54]; p=0.04). CONCLUSIONS:Pressure-pain testing may identify patients who are less likely to respond to SA. This effect may relate to the levels of brain excitatory neurotransmitters.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Clinical trials of acupuncture in chronic pain have largely failed to demonstrate efficacy of traditional over sham acupuncture. However, it should be noted that sham acupuncture is not inert. OBJECTIVE: To determine if experimental-pressure pain assessment and chemical neuroimaging can identify differential responsiveness to sham as opposed to traditional acupuncture. PATIENTS AND INTERVENTION: Fifty patients with fibromyalgia were randomized to either 9 traditional (TA) or sham (SA) acupuncture treatments over a period of 4 weeks. Both participants and assessors were blinded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measures were pressure-pain sensitivity at the thumbnail, insular glutamate+glutamine (Glx), and clinical pain. RESULTS:PATIENTS WITH LOW PAIN SENSITIVITY (LPS), BUT NOT WITH HIGH PAIN SENSITIVITY (HPS), HAD A SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED CLINICAL PAIN RESPONSE TO SA (CHANGE IN MEAN [STANDARD DEVIATION (SD)]: HPS -8.65 [7.91]; LPS -2.14 [6.68]; p=0.03). This relationship was not the case for TA (HPS -6.90 [4.51]; LPS -6.41 [9.25]; p=0.88). SA-treated patients who were more sensitive also had greater baseline levels of insular Glx than patients who were less sensitive (Glx mean [SD]: HPS 11.3 [1.18]; LPS 10.2 [0.54]; p=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Pressure-pain testing may identify patients who are less likely to respond to SA. This effect may relate to the levels of brain excitatory neurotransmitters.
Authors: Richard E Harris; Xiaoming Tian; David A Williams; Thomas X Tian; Thomas R Cupps; Frank Petzke; Kimberly H Groner; Pinaki Biswas; Richard H Gracely; Daniel J Clauw Journal: J Altern Complement Med Date: 2005-08 Impact factor: 2.579
Authors: Thorsten Giesecke; David A Williams; Richard E Harris; Thomas R Cupps; Xiaoming Tian; Thomas X Tian; Richard H Gracely; Daniel J Clauw Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 2003-10
Authors: Andrew J Vickers; Angel M Cronin; Alexandra C Maschino; George Lewith; Hugh MacPherson; Nadine E Foster; Karen J Sherman; Claudia M Witt; Klaus Linde Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2012-10-22
Authors: Tudor Puiu; Anson E Kairys; Lynne Pauer; Tobias Schmidt-Wilcke; Eric Ichesco; Johnson P Hampson; Vitaly Napadow; Daniel J Clauw; Richard E Harris Journal: Arthritis Rheumatol Date: 2016-06 Impact factor: 10.995
Authors: Noah A Zucker; Alex Tsodikov; Scott D Mist; Stephen Cina; Vitaly Napadow; Richard E Harris Journal: Pain Med Date: 2017-08-01 Impact factor: 3.750
Authors: Shannon M Smith; Robert H Dworkin; Dennis C Turk; Ralf Baron; Michael Polydefkis; Irene Tracey; David Borsook; Robert R Edwards; Richard E Harris; Tor D Wager; Lars Arendt-Nielsen; Laurie B Burke; Daniel B Carr; Amy Chappell; John T Farrar; Roy Freeman; Ian Gilron; Veeraindar Goli; Juergen Haeussler; Troels Jensen; Nathaniel P Katz; Jeffrey Kent; Ernest A Kopecky; David A Lee; William Maixner; John D Markman; Justin C McArthur; Michael P McDermott; Lav Parvathenani; Srinivasa N Raja; Bob A Rappaport; Andrew S C Rice; Michael C Rowbotham; Jeffrey K Tobias; Ajay D Wasan; James Witter Journal: J Pain Date: 2017-02-27 Impact factor: 5.820
Authors: Jiang-Ti Kong; Chelcie Puetz; Lu Tian; Isaac Haynes; Eunyoung Lee; Randall S Stafford; Rachel Manber; Sean Mackey Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2020-10-01