| Literature DB >> 28286776 |
Bo Dong1, Zeqin Chen1, Xuan Yin1, Danting Li2, Jie Ma1, Ping Yin1, Yan Cao1, Lixing Lao3, Shifen Xu1.
Abstract
Objective. To evaluate the effectiveness of acupuncture as monotherapy and as an alternative therapy in treating depression-related insomnia. Data Source. Seven databases were searched starting from 1946 to March 30, 2016. Study Eligibility Criteria. Randomized-controlled trials of adult subjects (18-75 y) who had depression-related insomnia and had received acupuncture. Results. 18 randomized-controlled clinical trials (RCTs) were introduced in this meta-analysis. The findings determined that the acupuncture treatment made significant improvements in PSQI score (MD = -2.37, 95% CI -3.52 to -1.21) compared with Western medicine. Acupuncture combined with Western medicine had a better effect on improving sleep quality (MD = -2.63, 95% CI -4.40 to -0.86) compared with the treatment of Western medicine alone. There was no statistical difference (MD = -2.76, 95% CI -7.65 to 2.12) between acupuncture treatment and Western medicine towards improving the HAMD score. Acupuncture combined with Western medicine (MD = -5.46, CI -8.55 to -2.38) had more effect on improving depression degree compared with the Western medicine alone. Conclusion. This systematic review indicates that acupuncture could be an alternative therapy to medication for treating depression-related insomnia.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28286776 PMCID: PMC5329663 DOI: 10.1155/2017/9614810
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Figure 1Flowchart of study selection.
Summary of basic characteristics of the included studies.
| First author (year) | Sample size (male/female) | Random method | Treatment | Control | Frequency | Acupoints | Place | Time | Course | Outcome measurements | Follow-Up | Safety | Assessment of bias | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cao (2009) | 60 | 60 | The random number table | AC | Estazolam | Per day | GV20, H7, EX-HN1, SP6, B62, K6 | Guangdong | >1 m | Not reported | HAMD; PSQI | Not reported | Not reported | +; ?; −; +; −; +; −; ? |
| Feng (2011) | 40 | 40 | The random number table | AC | Fluoxetine | Per day | ST40, SP9, SP10, SP6, EX-HN3, DU20, EX-HN1, PC6, TF4 | Beijing | >1 m | 30 d | HAMD; PSQI; SDS | Not reported | Not reported | +; −; −; −; +; −; ? |
| He (2010) | 30 | 30 | The random number table | AC | Estazolam | Per day | GV20, GV17, G19, ST36, P6, H7, SP6, LIV3 | Guangdong | >1 m | 4 w | SAS; SDS; PSQI | Not reported | Not reported | +; −; −; −; +; −; ? |
| Ji (2013) | 93 | 94 | Visiting sequence | AC | Trazodone | Per day | H7, GV20, GV29, LI4, LIV3 | Jiangsu | >1 m | 20 d | PSQI; HAMD; ASBERG; effective rate | Not reported | Y | −; −; −; −; +; −; ? |
| Liu (2009) | 30 | 30 | The random number table | AC | Clonazepam | Per day | Sishenzhen, P6, SP6, Dingshenzhen, B62, K2 | Guangdong | >1 m | 18 d | PSQI; SDS; effective rate | 1–3 m | Not reported | +; −; −; −; +; −; ? |
| Luo (2010) | 33 | 33 | Computer software SPSS | AC | Trazodone and Mesyre | Per day | H7, GV20, GV29, LI4, LIV3 | Jiangsu | 2 m~3 y | 4 w | PSQI; SDS; SERS | Not reported | Y | +; −; −; −; +; +; ? |
| Song (2007) | 60 | 60 | Computer software | AC | Estazolam | 5 times, one week | GV20, EX-HN1 | Beijing | 2 m~2 y | 4 w | SDS; PSQI; SERS | No | Y | +; −; −; +; +; +; ? |
| Song (2013) | 60 | 60 | The random number table | AC | Fluoxetine | Per day | GV20, GV24, B62, K2 | Hebei | 1–6 m | 4 w | HAMD; PSQI; effective rate; SERS | Not reported | Y | +; −; −; −; +; +; ? |
| Wang (2004) | 34 | 30 | The random number table | AC | Estazolam | 5 times, one week | H7, P6, CV12, ST36, K3 | Beijing | >1 m | 4 w | HAMD; PSQI; effective rate | Not reported | Y | +; −; −; −; +; −; ? |
| Wang (2015) | 45 | 45 | Treatment sequence | AC | Mirtazapine | Per day | SP6, H7, EX-HN1 | Jilin | >1 m | 2 m | HAMD; PSQI; effective rate | Not reported | Not reported | −; −; −; −; ?; −; ? |
| Ye (2014) | 40 | 40 | Not reported | AC | Mirtazapine | Per day | H7, SP6, GV29, LIV3, GB34, ST36, P5 | Shanghai | >3 m | 3 m | HAMD; PSQI; effective rate | Not reported | Not reported | ?; −; −; −; +; +; ? |
| Yeung (2011) | 26 | 52 | Software | EA | Sham AC and placebo AC | 3 times, one week | EX-HN3, GV20, Ear Shenmen, EX-HN1 | Hong Kong | >1 m | 21 d | PSQI; HAMD; ISI | 1 m | Y | +; +; +; +; +; +; ? |
| Ka-Fai Chung (2015) | 60 | 90 | Software | EA | Sham AC and placebo AC | 3 times, one week | EX-HN3, GV20, and Ear Shenmen, EX-HN1, EX | Hong Kong | >1 m | 21 d | PSQI; HAMD; ISI | 1 m | Y | +; +; +; +; +; +; ? |
| Wang (2006) | 23 | 22 | Treatment date | AC combined with antidepression drugs | Antidepression drugs | Per day | GV24, GV20, GV14, DU11, CV9 | Jiang Su | Not reported | 4 w | HAMD; PSQI | Not reported | Not reported | −; −; −; ?; ?; −; ? |
| Feng (2006) | 52 | 52 (34/18) | Not reported | AC combined with ultraviolet oral fluoxetine and alprazolam | Fluoxetine and alprazolam | Per day | P6, K3, H7, CV12, ST36 | He Nan | >1 m | 20 d | HAMD; PSQI | 3 m | Not reported | ?; −; −; −; −; −; ? |
| Li (2005) | 26 | 24 | Not reported | AC combined with fluoxetine | Fluoxetine | Per day | EX-HN22, GV20, GV29 | Bei Jing | 2 m~22 y | 28 d | Effective rate | Not reported | Not reported | ?; −; −; −; +; −; ? |
| Liu (2010) | 30 | 30 | Not reported | AC combined with Wuling Capsule | Wuling Capsule | Per day | GV20, GV29, H7, GV26, EX-HN1 | He Nan | 1~12 y | 4 w | HAMD; PSQI; TESS | Not reported | Not reported | ?; −; −; −; +; −; ? |
| Zhang (2015) | 30 | 30 | Not reported | AC combined with Guipi decoction | Mirtazapine | Per day | H7, GV29, GV20, EX-HN22, ST36, SP6, P6 | Guang Dong | >1 m | 4 w | SDS; PSQI | Not reported | Not reported | ?; −; −; −; +; −; ? |
Notes. AC: acupuncture; EA: electroacupuncture; SERS: rating scale for side effects; TESS: treatment emergent symptom scale; ISI: insomnia severity index. The risk of bias evaluation: random sequence generation; allocation concealment; using blind method; the blind assessment; data integrity; selective reporting bias; other forms. −: high risk, +: low risk; ?: not reported. The ratio of male to female was not reported in WH2009 Song, SC2013 Liu and Song Q2007.
Figure 2Results of quality assessment of included randomized controlled trials or prospective comparative studies. (a) Potential risk of bias of each included study. (b) Summarized risk of included studies.
Figure 3Meta-analysis for PSQI score of acupuncture versus Western medicine. Note. Mean: the average of the outcomes; SD: standard deviation; total: the count of the patients; weight: the credibility of the test; IV: variance methods; random: random effects model; CI: confidence interval.
Figure 4Meta-analysis for PSQI score of acupuncture combined with medicine versus single medicine. Note. Mean: the average of the outcomes; SD: standard deviation; total: the count of the patients; weight: the credibility of the test; IV: variance methods; random: random effects model; CI: confidence interval.
Figure 5Meta-analysis for PSQI score of electroacupuncture versus sham acupuncture or placebo acupuncture. Note. Mean: the average of the outcomes; SD: standard deviation; total: the count of the patients; weight: the credibility of the test; IV: variance methods; random: random effects model; CI: confidence interval.
Figure 6Meta-analysis of HAMD score of acupuncture versus Western medicine. Note. Mean: the average of the outcomes; SD: standard deviation; total: the count of the patients; weight: the credibility of the test; IV: variance methods; random: random effects model; CI: confidence interval.
Figure 7Meta-analysis of HAMD score of acupuncture combined with medicine versus single medicine. Note. Mean: the average of the outcomes; SD: standard deviation; total: the count of the patients; weight: the credibility of the test; IV: variance methods; random: random effects model; CI: confidence interval.
Figure 8Meta-analysis of HAMD score of electroacupuncture versus sham acupuncture or placebo acupuncture. Note. Mean: the average of the outcomes; SD: standard deviation; total: the count of the patients; weight: the credibility of the test; IV: variance methods; random: random effects model; CI: confidence interval.
Figure 9Meta-analysis of effective rate of the treatment of acupuncture versus Western medicine. Note. Events: the effective number of patients; total: the count of the patients; weight: the credibility of the test; M-H: Mantel-Haenszel methods; fixed: fixed effects model; CI: confidence interval.
Figure 10Publication bias for PSQI score of the treatment of acupuncture versus Western medicine. The funnel plot was asymmetric: four articles were on the right side of the line and 6 on the left.