| Literature DB >> 27118981 |
Tao Wang1, Renli Deng1, Jing-Yu Tan2, Feng-Guang Guan3.
Abstract
This study aims at concluding the current evidence on the therapeutic effects of acupoints stimulation for cancer patients with anxiety and depression. Randomized controlled trials using acupoints stimulation for relieving anxiety and/or depression in cancer patients were searched, and 11 studies were finally included, of which eight trials compared acupoints stimulation with standard methods of treatment/care, and acupoints stimulation showed significantly better effects in improving depression than using standard methods of treatment/care. Four studies compared true acupoints stimulation with sham methods, and no significant differences can be found between groups for either depression or anxiety, although the pooled effects still favored true intervention. For the five studies that evaluated sleep quality, the results were conflicting, with three supporting the superiority of acupoints stimulation in improving sleep quality and two demonstrating no differences across groups. Acupoints stimulation seems to be an effective approach in relieving depression and anxiety in cancer patients, and placebo effects may partially contribute to the benefits. However, the evidence is not conclusive due to the limited number of included studies and the clinical heterogeneity identified among trials. More rigorous designed randomized, sham-controlled studies are necessary in future research.Entities:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27118981 PMCID: PMC4828553 DOI: 10.1155/2016/5645632
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Selected search strategies.
| ID | Searching strategies | Records |
|---|---|---|
| PubMed | ||
| #1 | Search “acupuncture”[MeSH Terms] | 17708 |
| #2 | Search “acupuncture therapy”[MeSH Terms] | 16944 |
| #3 | Search “acupressure”[MeSH Terms] | 465 |
| #4 | Search “acupuncture, ear”[MeSH Terms] | 267 |
| #5 | Search “acupuncture points”[MeSH Terms] | 4063 |
| #6 | Search “electroacupuncture”[MeSH Terms] | 2566 |
| #7 | Search “auriculotherapy”[MeSH Terms] | 277 |
| #8 | #1 OR #2 OR #3 OR #4 OR #5 OR #6 OR #7 | 17958 |
| #9 | Search ((((((((acupunctur | 104918 |
| #10 | #8 or #9 | 108214 |
| #11 | Search “neoplasms”[MeSH Terms] | 2609885 |
| #12 | Search ((((((((cance | 2345516 |
| #13 | #11 OR #12 | 3231222 |
| #14 | Search “anxiety”[MeSH Terms] | 56178 |
| #15 | Search “anxiety disorders”[MeSH Terms] | 67844 |
| #16 | Search “depression”[MeSH Terms] | 153512 |
| #17 | Search “depressive disorder”[MeSH Terms] | 80897 |
| #18 | Search “mood disorders”[MeSH Terms] | 115156 |
| #19 | Search “affective disorders, psychotic”[MeSH Terms] | 33045 |
| #20 | Search “stress, psychological”[MeSH Terms] | 92744 |
| #21 | #14 OR #15 OR #16 OR #17 OR #18 OR #19 OR #20 | 346299 |
| #22 | Search (((((((anxiet | 518732 |
| #23 | #21 OR #22 | 687179 |
| #24 | #10 AND #13 AND #23 | 251 |
|
| ||
| Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) | ||
| #1 | MeSH descriptor: [Acupuncture Therapy] explode all trees | 3132 |
| #2 | MeSH descriptor: [Acupuncture] explode all trees | 151 |
| #3 | MeSH descriptor: [Acupressure] explode all trees | 227 |
| #4 | MeSH descriptor: [Acupuncture Points] explode all trees | 1069 |
| #5 | MeSH descriptor: [Acupuncture, Ear] explode all trees | 123 |
| #6 | MeSH descriptor: [Auriculotherapy] explode all trees | 129 |
| #7 | MeSH descriptor: [Electroacupuncture] explode all trees | 473 |
| #8 | acupunctur | 13648 |
| #9 | #1 or #2 or #3 or #4 or #5 or #6 or #7 or #8 | 13710 |
| #10 | MeSH descriptor: [Neoplasms] explode all trees | 52791 |
| #11 | neoplasm | 94737 |
| #12 | #10 or #11 | 100138 |
| #13 | MeSH descriptor: [Anxiety] explode all trees | 5187 |
| #14 | MeSH descriptor: [Anxiety Disorders] explode all trees | 4954 |
| #15 | MeSH descriptor: [Depression] explode all trees | 5472 |
| #16 | MeSH descriptor: [Affective Disorders, Psychotic] explode all trees | 1648 |
| #17 | MeSH descriptor: [Emotions] explode all trees | 11649 |
| #18 | anxiet | 102362 |
| #19 | #13 or #14 or #15 or #16 or #17 or #18 | 103970 |
| #20 | #9 and #12 and #19 | 108 |
| #21 | #20 in Tails | 84 |
Figure 1Flow chart of study selection.
Characteristics of included trials.
| Study & setting | Types of cancer | Sample size | Acupoints stimulation intervention | Control | Primary and/or secondary outcomes | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Types of acupoints stimulation | Selected acupoints | |||||
| Sa1: Bao et al., 2014 [ | Breast cancer |
|
| Guanyuan (CV4), Qihai (CV6), Zhongwan (CV12), Hegu (LI4) |
| (i) |
|
| ||||||
| S2: Deng et al., 2013 [ | Various types of cancer |
|
| Qihai (CV6), Guanyuan (CV4), Taixi (KI3), Zusanli (ST36), Sanyinjiao (SP6), Quchi (LI11), Yinxi (HT6), and auricular point for antidepression |
| (i) |
|
| ||||||
| S3: Feng et al., 2011 [ | Various types of cancer |
|
| Fenglong (ST40); Yinlingquan (SP9); Xuehai (SP10); Sanyinjiao (SP6); Yintang (EX-HN3); Baihui (DU20); Sishencong (EX-HN1); Neiguan (PC6); and Shenmen (TF4) |
| (i) |
|
| ||||||
| S4: Mao et al., 2014 [ | Breast cancer |
|
| At least 4 local points around the joint with the most pain and at least 4 distant points to address nonpain symptoms commonly observed in conjunction with pain |
| (i) |
|
| ||||||
| S5: Tang et al., 2014 [ | Lung cancer |
|
| Hegu (LI4); Zusanli (ST36); Sanyinjiao (SP6) |
| (i) |
|
| ||||||
| S6: Walker et al., 2010 [ | Breast cancer |
|
| Kidney 3; Urinary bladder 23; Spleen 6; Gallbladder 20; Du 14; Du 20; Stomach 36; Liver 3; Heart 7; Pericardium 7; Ren 6; Lung 9 |
| (i) |
|
| ||||||
| S7: Frisk et al., 2012 [ | Breast cancer |
|
| Xinshu (BL15); Shenshu (BL23); |
| (i) |
|
| ||||||
| S8: Molassiotis et al., 2012 [ | Breast cancer |
|
| Zusanli (ST36); Sanyinjiao (SP6); Hegu (LI4); and some alternative points [Yanglingquan (GB34) and Yinlingquan (SP9)] |
| (i) |
|
| ||||||
| S9: Molassiotis et al., 2013 [ | Breast cancer |
|
| Zusanli (ST36); Sanyinjiao (SP6); Hegu (LI4) |
| (i) |
|
| ||||||
| S10: Xiang et al., 2006 [ | Various types of cancer (details not given) |
|
| Neiguan (PC6); Zusanli (ST36); Sanyinjiao (SP6); Baihui (DU20); Taixi (KI3); Yintang (EX-HN3); and so forth. |
|
|
|
| ||||||
| S11: Shi et al., 2013 [ | Gynecological cancer |
|
| Neiguan (PC6); Zusanli (ST36); Sanyinjiao (SP6); Taichong (LR3); Hegu (LI4); Guanyuan (RN4); Qihai (RN6); Taixi (KI3); Shenshu (BL23); Ganshu (BL18); Pishu (BL20) |
|
|
aS = study, Primary and/or secondary outcomes which were determined by the systematic review.
Methodological and quality assessment of included trials.
| Criteria | Sa1 | S2 | S3 | S4 | S5 | S6 | S7 | S8 | S9 | S10 | S11 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (1) “Was the method of randomization adequate?” | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ? | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ? |
| (2) “Was the treatment allocation concealed?” |
| ✓ | ? | ✓ | ? | ? | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ? | ? |
| (3) “Was the patient blinded to the intervention?” | ✓ | ✓ | ? | ✓ | ✓ | ? | ? |
|
| ? | ? |
| (4) “Was the care provider blinded to the intervention?” |
|
| ? |
|
| ? | ? |
|
| ? | ? |
| (5) “Was the outcome assessor blinded to the intervention?” | ✓ | ✓ | ? | ✓ | ✓ | ? | ? |
|
| ? | ? |
| (6) “Was the drop-out rate described and acceptable?” | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| (7) “Were all randomized participants analyzed in the group to which they were allocated?” | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
|
|
| ✓ | ✓ |
| (8) “Are reports of the study free of suggestion of selective outcome reporting?” | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ? | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| (9) “Were the groups similar at baseline regarding the most important prognostic indicators?” | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| (10) “Were co-interventions avoided or similar?” | ✓ | ✓ | ? | ✓ | ? | ? | ✓ | ? | ? | ✓ | ? |
| (11) Was the compliance acceptable in all groups? | ? | ? | ? | ✓ | ✓ | ? | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ? | ? |
| (12) “Was the timing of the outcome assessment similar in all groups?” | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| (13) “Are other sources of potential bias unlikely?” | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |
Based on [37].
aS: study, ✓: low risk of bias; ✗: high risk of bias; ?: unclear risk of bias.
Summary of meta-analyses.
| Study outcomes | Number of trials | Number of participants | Statistical method | Effect estimate | Test for overall effect | Heterogeneity ( | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| ||||||
| Overall assessment of acupoints stimulation: acupoints stimulation versus different comparisons (for anxiety) | |||||||
| Acupoints stimulation versus standard methods of treatment/care | 3 | 567 | NR | NR | NR | NR | NA |
| Acupoints stimulation versus sham acupoints stimulation | 2 | 137 | Mean difference (IV, random, 95% CI) | −0.65 [−2.84, 1.53] | 0.59 | 0.56 | >50% |
|
| |||||||
| Overall assessment of acupoints stimulation: acupoints stimulation versus different comparisons (for depression) | |||||||
| Acupoints stimulation versus standard methods of treatment/care | 5 | 485 | Mean difference (IV, random, 95% CI) | −1.08 [−1.97, −0.19] | 2.39 | 0.02 | >50% |
| Acupoints stimulation versus sham acupoints stimulation | 2 | 137 | Mean difference (IV, random, 95% CI) | −0.27 [−2.66, 2.12] | 0.23 | 0.82 | 50% |
|
| |||||||
| Subgroup analysis: different types of acupoints stimulation versus standard methods of treatment/care (for anxiety) | |||||||
| Electroacupuncture | 2 | 112 | NR | NR | NR | NR | NA |
| Acupuncture | 2 | 302 | NR | NR | NR | NR | NA |
|
| |||||||
| Subgroup analysis: different types of acupoints stimulation versus standard methods of treatment/care (for depression) | |||||||
| Electroacupuncture | 2 | 159 | NR | NR | NR | NR | NA |
| Acupuncture | 4 | 393 | Mean difference (IV, random, 95% CI) | −2.55 [−3.61, −1.49] | 4.72 | <0.00001 | >50% |
|
| |||||||
| Subgroup analysis: different types of acupoints stimulation versus sham comparison (for anxiety) | |||||||
| Acupuncture | 2 | 152 | NR | NR | NR | NR | NA |
| Acupressure | 1 | 57 | NR | NR | NR | NR | NA |
|
| |||||||
| Subgroup analysis: different types of acupoints stimulation versus sham comparison (for depression) | |||||||
| Acupuncture | 2 | 152 | NR | NR | NR | NR | NA |
| Acupressure | 1 | 57 | NR | NR | NR | NR | NA |
IV: inverse variance, CI: confidence interval, NR: not reported because pooling was not conducted due to the insufficient number of studies, different models of data, or absence of data, NA: not applicable
Sample was adopted from one study (as the sample of the other study was based on the study we adopted).