Patchara Ruengwongroj1, Sombat Muengtaweepongsa2, Jayanton Patumanond3, Phichayut Phinyo4. 1. Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Chiang Rai Regional Hospital, Chiang Rai, 57210, Thailand. Electronic address: PATCHARA.RE@cpird.in.th. 2. Center of Excellence in Stroke, Faculty of Medicine, Thammasat University, Pathum Thani, 12120, Thailand. Electronic address: musombat@staff.tu.ac.th. 3. Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Clinical Statistics, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, 50200, Thailand. Electronic address: jpatumanond@gmail.com. 4. Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Clinical Statistics, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, 50200, Thailand; Department of Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, 50200, Thailand. Electronic address: phichayutphinyo@gmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) is a well-known painful syndrome. Acupuncture is a treatment for PHN. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of pain control between press needle and electroacupuncture (EA) in PHN patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study by a review of PHN patients treated with the press needle and the EA and compared the Pain visual analogue scale (VAS) before and after treatment. Propensity score matching was applied to adjust the confounding. RESULTS: 48 patients in each group had a matched propensity score. The absolute reduction of VAS in the press needle and the EA groups were not different (5.4±2.8 vs. 5.4±2.9, p=0.971). The VAS score improvement was not statistically different between groups. CONCLUSION: The Press needle and the EA are equally effective in the treatment of PHN.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) is a well-known painful syndrome. Acupuncture is a treatment for PHN. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of pain control between press needle and electroacupuncture (EA) in PHN patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study by a review of PHN patients treated with the press needle and the EA and compared the Pain visual analogue scale (VAS) before and after treatment. Propensity score matching was applied to adjust the confounding. RESULTS: 48 patients in each group had a matched propensity score. The absolute reduction of VAS in the press needle and the EA groups were not different (5.4±2.8 vs. 5.4±2.9, p=0.971). The VAS score improvement was not statistically different between groups. CONCLUSION: The Press needle and the EA are equally effective in the treatment of PHN.
Authors: Hantong Hu; Yejing Shen; Xinwei Li; Hongfang Tian; XingLing Li; Yang Li; Yingying Cheng; Lei Wu; Dexiong Han Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) Date: 2021-05-21