| Literature DB >> 27242910 |
Suzanne Cochrane1, Caroline A Smith2, Alphia Possamai-Inesedy3, Alan Bensoussan2.
Abstract
The global average of couples with fertility problems is 9%. Assisted reproductive technologies are often inaccessible. Evidence points to acupuncture offering an opportunity to promote natural fertility. This study asked whether providing a multiphasic fertility acupuncture protocol to women with sub/infertility would increase their awareness of fertility and achieve normalisation of their menstrual cycle compared with a lifestyle control. In a pragmatic randomised controlled trial sub/infertile women were offered an intervention of acupuncture and lifestyle modification or lifestyle modification only. There was a statistically significant increase in fertility awareness in the acupuncture group (86.4%, 19) compared to 40% (n = 8) of the lifestyle only participants (Relative Risk (RR) 2.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) of 1.25, 4.50), with an adjusted p value of 0.011. Changes in menstrual regularity were not statistically significant. There was no statistical difference in the pregnancy rate with seven women (adjusted p = 0.992) achieving pregnancy during the course of the study intervention. Those receiving the acupuncture conceived within an average of 5.5 weeks compared to 10.67 weeks for the lifestyle only group (p = 0.422). The acupuncture protocol tested influenced women who received it compared to women who used lifestyle modification alone: their fertility awareness and wellbeing increased, and those who conceived did so in half the time.Entities:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27242910 PMCID: PMC4868913 DOI: 10.1155/2016/3587569
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Extract of guidelines issued to trial acupuncturists.
| Frequency | Weekly | |||
|
| ||||
| Number of treatments | 9 | |||
|
| ||||
| Timing | 1 hour [include front (anterior) and back (posterior) treatment per session] | |||
|
| ||||
| Point location | As per Deadman's | |||
|
| ||||
| Needle depth | As per Deadman's | |||
|
| ||||
| Manipulation | Achieve deqi on insertion and renew qi sensation 10–15 minutes after insertion | |||
|
| ||||
| Retention time | 20–30 minutes | |||
|
| ||||
| Needling | Bilateral unless on Ren and Du channels | |||
|
| ||||
| Needles | Use needles supplied by Helio Supply Co., that is, AcuGlide and Vinco | |||
|
| ||||
| Heat | If heat is necessary, apply using TDP lamp or smokeless moxa | |||
|
| ||||
| Differential diagnosis relating to phase of menstrual cycle | Phase 1 | Phase 2 | Phase 3 | Phase 4 |
|
| ||||
| Core points [ | Sp 10, 6, 8 | Ren 4, 7 | Liv 3, 5 | (A) [boost yang by supplementing yin] |
|
| ||||
| Examples of other commonly used acupoints |
| GV 20, Yintang, Ht 7, Pc 6, Kidney chest pts: Ki 23, 24, 25 | ||
| Ovulation failure | St 29, Ren 4, 3 Zigong, LI 4, Sp 6 | |||
| Biomedical diagnosis, PCOS | Sp 6, Zigong, Ren 3, 4, Bl 20, 23, 18 | |||
|
| ||||
| Termination of treatment | On pregnancy | |||
| For 2 weeks after embryo transfer or on negative pregnancy test | ||||
Figure 1Flowchart of participants through trial.
Baseline characteristics of women at trial entry to allocated treatment group.
| Acupuncture intervention | Lifestyle only intervention |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 33.14 (5.4) | 33.93 (5.0) | 0.572 |
| Fertility history | |||
| Gravida = 0 | 11 (39.3) | 7 (25) | 0.252 |
| Parity = 1 or >1 | 8 (28.6) | 7 (32.1) | 0.771 |
| Duration of infertility | |||
| Mean (SD) | 3.9 (3.4) | 5.8 (4.6) | 0.080 |
| Reasons for infertility | |||
| Female factor | 15 (53.6) | 11 (39.3) | |
| Unexplained | 10 (35.7) | 13 (26.4) | |
| Unknown, combined + male factor | 3 (10.7) | 4 (14.3) | |
| Biomedical fertility diagnosis | |||
| PCOS | 12 (42.9) | 9 (32.1) | 0.408 |
| Unknown | 10 (35.7) | 14 (50) | |
| Other | 6 (21.4) | 5 (17.9) | |
| BMI | |||
| Combined mean (SD) | 30.0 (9.8) | 30.3 (7.4) | 0.893 |
| Previous use of acupuncture | 13 (46.4) | 12 (42.9) | 0.788 |
| Demographic details | |||
| Employment | |||
| Working full time | 17 (60.7) | 16 (57.1) | 0.528 |
| Working part time | 8 (28.6) | 6 (21.4) | |
| Unemployed/home duties | 2 (7.1) | 6 (17.9) | |
| Education status | |||
| School incompletion | 0 | 2 (7.1) | |
| School/TAFE completion | 16 (57.1) | 13 (46.4) | 0.309 |
| Tertiary completion | 12 (42.9) | 13 (46.4) | |
| Racial origin | |||
| Caucasian | 16 (57.1) | 19 (67.9) | 0.408 |
| English speaking background (ESB) | 15 | 18 | 0.415 |
| NESB | 13 | 10 | 0.275 |
| Marital status | |||
| Married | 25 (89.3) | 22 (78.6) | |
| De facto | 3 (10.7) | 6 (21.4) |
∗ indicates possible significance, for example, p < 0.05.
Secondary study endpoints by treatment group.
| Acupuncture intervention | Lifestyle only intervention |
| Adjusted analysis | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pregnancy (%) | ||||
| Incidence | 4 (16) | 31 (15) | 0.927 | 0.992 |
| Time from study entry to conception (weeks) | 5.5 | 10.67 | 0.422 | 0.452 |
| Quality of life changes (MYMOP) | ||||
| Changes in symptom 1 | 1.27 (2.1) | 1.55 (1.5) | 0.628 | 0.775 |
| Changes in symptom 2 | 1.81 (1.4) | 1.40 (1.1) | 0.305 | 0.291 |
| Changes in activity | 1.80 (1.2) | 0.94 (1.2) | 0.033 | 0.047 |
| Changes in wellbeing | 0.95 (1.4) | 0.05 (1.4) | 0.043 | 0.042 |
| Change in MYMOP profile score | 1.47 (1.1) | 1.03 (0.8) | 0.156 | 0.165 |
| Lifestyle change (BMI) | ||||
| Change in BMI (mean (SD)) | 0.0318 (1.1) | −0.75 (1.3) | 0.475 | 0.585 |
| Sustained lifestyle change at 12 months | 10 (53) | 6 (50) | 0.886 | |
| Acceptability of intervention | ||||
| Completion of exit interview | 22 (78.57) | 20 (71.43) | 0.314 | |
| Record of menstrual changes | 26 (92.86) | 16 (57.14) | 0.677 |
1One of these pregnancies was achieved through IVF due to male factor problems for the couple. The participant advised the researcher after her pregnancy that she had used acupuncture prior to this conception, her first ever after years of IVF cycles.
∗ indicates possible statistical significance, for example, p < 0.05.
Primary study endpoints by treatment group.
| Acupuncture intervention | Lifestyle only intervention |
| Adjusted analysis | RR/CI (CI 95%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Increase in fertility awareness (%) | 19 (86.4) | 8 (40) | 0.002 | 0.011 | 2.38 (1.25, 4.50) |
| Regularity of cycle | |||||
| At entry (%) | 20 (71.4) | 20 (71.4) | |||
| M1 | 16 (61.5) | 12 (70.6) | 0.543 | 0.823 | 0.87 (0.57, 1.34) |
| M2 | 12 (60) | 5 (45.5) | 0.436 | 0.262 | 1.32 (0.63, 2.77) |
| M3 | 5 (71.4) | 4 (50) | 0.398 | 0.252 | 1.43 (0.65, 3.30) |
| Menstrual details (mean/SD) | |||||
| Length of period | |||||
| M entry | 4.86 (2.3) | 4.85 (1.5) | 0.984 | ||
| M1 | 5.39 (2.5) | 5.08 (1.1) | 0.671 | 0.383 | 0.31 (−1.18, 1.8) |
| M2 | 5.11 (2.0) | 4.33 (1.4) | 0.255 | 0.631 | 0.78 (−0.77, 2.33) |
| M3 | 5.11 (1.3) | 4.67 (1.3) | 0.478 | 0.452 | 0.44 (−0.85, 1.73) |
| M exit | 4.52 (2.2) | 4.72 (2.2) | 0.783 | 0.764 | −0.2 (−1.65, 1.25) |
| Length of cycle | |||||
| M entry | 34.64 (18.3) | 35.43 (18.4) | 0.873 | ||
| M1 | 32.52 (13.9) | 31.00 (6.2) | 0.713 | 0.360 | 1.52 (−6.8, 9.84) |
| M2 | 29.12 (4.0) | 29.25 (8.9) | 0.957 | 0.802 | −0.13 (−5.15, 4.89) |
| M3 | 29.43 (2.6) | 26.78 (3.1) | 0.091 | 0.996 | 2.65 (−0.48, 5.78) |
| M exit | 29.05 (11.9) | 30.65 (6.4) | 0.624 | 0.285 | −1.6 (−8.15, 4.95) |
| Nature of menstrual flow (%) | |||||
| Heavy |
| ||||
| M entry | 11 (39.3) | 12 (42.9) | 0.92 (0.49, 1.72) | ||
| M1 | 11 (44) | 2 (12.5) | 3.52 (0.89, 13.85) | ||
| M2 | 11 (55) | 1 (11.1) | 4.95 (0.75, 32.76) | ||
| M3 | 2 (28.6) | 2 (28.6) | 1 (0.19, 5.25) | ||
| Moderate | |||||
| M entry | 9 (32.1) | 11 (39.3) | 0.82 (0.4, 1.66) | ||
| M1 | 10 (40) | 8 (50) | 0.8 (0.4, 1.59) | ||
| M2 | 6 (30) | 3 (33.3) | 0.9 (0.29, 2.82) | ||
| M3 | 3 (42.9) | 2 (28.6) | 1.5 (0.35, 6.4) | ||
| Light | |||||
| M entry | 5 (17.9) | 4 (14.3) | 1.25 (0.37, 4.17) | ||
| M1 | 4 (16) | 6 (37.5) | 0.43 (0.14, 1.28) | ||
| M2 | 1 (5) | 5 (55.6) | 0.09 (0.01, 0.66) | ||
| M3 | 2 (28.6) | 3 (42.9) | 0.67 (0.16, 2.84) | ||
| Inconsistent | |||||
| M entry | 3 (10.7) | 1 (3.6) | 3 (0.33, 27.12) | ||
| M1 | 0 | 0 | |||
| M2 | 2 (10) | 0 | |||
| M3 | 0 | 0 |
∗ indicates possible statistical significance, for example, p < 0.05.
Primary study endpoints by treatment group (C).
| Acupuncture intervention | Lifestyle only intervention |
| Adjusted analysis | RR/CI (CI 95%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Incidence of menstrual clots (%) | |||||
| None | |||||
| M entry | 10 (35.7) | 9 (32.1) | M entry 0.556 | 1.11 (0.53, 2.31) | |
| M1 | 11 (45.8) | 11 (73.3) | M1 0.221 | 0.63 (0.37, 1.06) | |
| M2 | 9 (47.4) | 7 (77.8) | M2 0.287 | 0.61 (0.34, 1.1) | |
| M3 | 6 (85.7) | 4 (66.7) | M3 0.188 | 2.14 (0.95, 4.85) | |
| Small | |||||
| M entry | 12 (42.9) | 9 (32.1) | 1.33 (0.67, 2.65) | ||
| M1 | 8 (33.3) | 3 (20) | 1.67 (0.52, 5.31) | ||
| M2 | 7 (36.8) | 1 (11.1) | 3.32 (0.48, 23.06) | ||
| M3 | 1 (14.3) | 0 | |||
| Large | |||||
| M entry | 6 (21.4) | 9 (32.1) | 0.67 (0.27, 1.62) | ||
| M1 | 5 (20.8) | 1 (6.7) | 3.13 (0.4, 24.22) | ||
| M2 | 3 (15.8) | 1 (11.1) | 1.42 (0.17, 11.83) | ||
| M3 | 0 | 2 (33.3) | |||
| Variable | |||||
| M entry | 0 | 1 (3.6) | |||
| Incidence of menstrual pain | |||||
| M entry | 23 (82.1) | 20 (71.4) | 0.342 | 1.15 (0.86, 1.54) | |
| M1 | 17 (68) | 5 (33.3) | 0.033 | 0.056 | 2.04 (0.95, 4.38) |
| M2 | 10 (50) | 3 (30) | 0.297 | 0.430 | 1.67 (0.59, 4.73) |
| M3 | 2 (28.6) | 3 (50) | 0.529 | 0.67(0.17, 2.67) | |
| Length of menstrual pain (mean (SD)) | |||||
| M entry | 1.7 (1.6) | 1.2 (1.0) | 0.669 | ||
| M1 | 1.46 (1.7) | 0.63 (1.4) | 0.108 | 0.238 | 0.83 (−0.2, 1.86) |
| M2 | 0.9 (1.2) | 0.47 (1.1) | 0.271 | 0.258 | 0.43 (−0.36, 1.22) |
| M3 | 0.57 (0.5) | 0.63 (1.1) | 0.906 | 0.587 | −0.06 (−1.02, 0.9) |
| Intensity of menstrual pain (mean (SD)) | |||||
| M entry | 3 (1.3) | 2 (1.4) | 0.261 | ||
| M1 | 3 (1.3) | 2 (1.4) | 0.146 | 0.285 | 1 (−0.37, 2.37) |
| M2 | 1.91 (1.4) | 2.67 (1.5) | 0.423 | 0.141 | −0.76 (−2.76, 1.24) |
| M3 | 1.5 (1.0) | 2.67 (1.5) | 0.272 | 0.840 | −1.17 (−3.6, 1.26) |
∗ indicates possible statistical significance, for example, p < 0.05.