| Literature DB >> 34349825 |
Lei Wang1, Jin-Lin Peng2, Fu-Qiang Qiao3, Wen-Ming Cheng4, Guang-Wen Lin4, Yao Zhang3, Tian-Ge Gao3, Ying-Ying Sun3, Wei-Zhong Tang4, Pu Wang1.
Abstract
This study aimed to summarize the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture in the treatment of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) through literature analysis and evaluation. All studies were retrieved from various databases as follows: English databases, such as PubMed, Cochrane Library, Ovid, and Web of Science, and Chinese databases, such as China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WanFang Data (WF), and Technology Periodical Database (VIP). The Cochrane Collaboration's Bias Risk Assessment Scale was used to assess the studies' risk of bias. The effects of acupuncture treatment for ASD were determined using the following indicators: childhood autism rating scale (CARS), autism behavior check list (ABC), Reynell developmental language scale (RDLS), and functional independence measure of children (WeeFIM). The risk map of bias of these studies' quality and the meta-analysis results of the indicators was prepared with RevMan 5.2 software. Finally, 16 studies were included, five of which were in English and 11 were in Chinese. The 16 studies included 1332 patients. The CARS results for subgroup analysis were as follows: acupuncture subgroup (MD = -2.65, 95% CI (-3.22, -2.07)) and acupuncture plus massage subgroup (MD = -10.35, 95% CI (-11.34, -9.36)). The ABC results were as follows: (MD = -6.70, 95% CI (-9.10, -4.29)). The analysis results of sensory, relating, language, body and object use, and social/self-help in the subitems of ABC were as follows: sensory (MD = -2.67, 95% CI (-2.90, -2.44)), relating (MD = -3.28, 95% CI (-3.55, -3.02)), language (MD = -2.45, 95% CI (-2.73, -2.16)), body and object use (MD = -1.19, 95% CI (-1.38, -1.00)), and social/self-help (MD = -2.09, 95% CI (-2.30, -1.89)). For the analysis results of comprehension and expression ages in the subitems of RDLS, the comprehension age results were as follows: (MD = 0.08, 95% CI (-0.06, 0.22), P = 0.27). Those of expression age were as follows: (MD = 0.15, 95% CI (0.04, 0.26), P=0.009). The WeeFIM results were as follows: (MD = 3.70, 95% CI (2.38, 5.02)). This study suggested that acupuncture could effectively treat ASD. However, acupuncture methods and prescriptions at this stage remain heterogeneous, and acupuncture treatment operations require standardization. Studies using rigorous and standard research designs are needed to draw stronger conclusions about the advantages of using acupuncture to treat children and adolescents with ASD.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34349825 PMCID: PMC8328702 DOI: 10.1155/2021/5549849
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Figure 1Flow chart of the study selection process.
Figure 2Risk of bias in included studies (A).
Figure 3Risk of bias in included studies (B).
Evidence quality classification.
| Certainty assessment | No. of patients | Effect | Certainty | Importance | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. of studies | Study design | Risk of bias | Inconsistency | Indirectness | Imprecision | Other considerations | Acupuncture | Rehabilitation training | Relative (95% CI) | Absolute (95% CI) | ||
|
| ||||||||||||
| 9 | Randomised trials | Seriousa | Seriousb | Not serious | Not serious | None | 356 | 367 | — | MD 4.6 lower (5.09 lower to 4.1 lower) | ⊕⊕○○ | Critical |
|
| ||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||
| 7 | Randomised trials | Seriousa | Not serious | Not serious | Not serious | Nonec | 258 | 269 | — | MD 2.65 lower (3.22 lower to 2.07 lower) | ⊕⊕⊕○ | Critical |
|
| ||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||
| 2 | Randomised trials | Seriousa | Not serious | Not serious | Seriousd | Publication bias strongly suspectedc | 98 | 98 | — | MD 10.35 lower (11.34 lower to 9.36 lower) | ⊕○○○ | Critical |
|
| ||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||
| 10 | Randomised trials | Seriousa | Seriousb | Not serious | Not serious | Publication bias strongly suspectede | 411 | 408 | — | MD 7.38 more (8.03 more to 6.74 more) | ⊕○○○ | Critical |
|
| ||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||
| 2 | Randomised trials | Seriousa | Not serious | Not serious | Seriousd | Publication bias strongly suspectedc | 76 | 75 | — | MD 2.67 more (2.9 more to 2.44 more) | ⊕○○○ | Important |
|
| ||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||
| 2 | Randomised trials | Seriousa | Not serious | Not serious | Seriousd | Publication bias strongly suspectedc | 76 | 75 | — | MD 2.09 more (2.3 more to 1.89 more) | ⊕○○○ | Important |
|
| ||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||
| 2 | Randomised trials | Seriousa | Not serious | Not serious | Seriousd | Publication bias strongly suspectedc | 76 | 75 | — | MD 1.19 more (1.38 more to 1 more) | ⊕○○○ | Important |
|
| ||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||
| 2 | Randomised trials | Seriousa | Not ious | Not serious | Seriousd | Publication bias strongly suspectedc | 76 | 75 | — | MD 3.28 more (3.55 more to 3.02 more) | ⊕○○○ | Important |
|
| ||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||
| 2 | Randomised trials | Seriousa | Not serious | Not serious | Seriousd | Publication bias strongly suspectedc | 76 | 75 | — | MD 2.45 more (2.73 more to 2.16 more) | ⊕○○○ | Important |
|
| ||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||
| 3 | Randomised trials | Seriousa | Not serious | Not serious | Seriousd | Publication bias strongly suspectedc | 67 | 59 | — | MD 0.15 higher (0.04 higher to 0.26 higher) | ⊕○○○ | Important |
|
| ||||||||||||
| 3 | Randomised trials | Seriousa | Not serious | Not serious | Seriousd | Publication bias strongly suspectedc | 67 | 59 | — | MD 0.08 higher (0.06 higher to 0.22 higher) | ⊕○○○ | Important |
|
| ||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||
| 3 | Randomised trials | Seriousa | Not serious | Not serious | Seriousd | Publication bias strongly suspectedc | 67 | 59 | — | MD 3.7 higher (2.38 higher to 5.02 higher) | ⊕○○○ | Important |
CI: confidence interval; MD: mean difference. Note.aThe included studies are biased in allocation concealment and blinding. bThe degree of overlap of the credible intervals of different studies is poor, and the I2 value of the combined results is larger. c The number of included studies is small, and they are positive, and there is a possibility of greater publication bias. dThe sample size does not meet the OIS standard. The form is completed on the GRADE PRO website: http://www.guidelinedevelopment.org/. The symbol “⊕” in the figure represents the level, and the more ⊕, the higher the level. eAsymmetric funnel chart.
Characteristics of the included studies.
| Authors, years | Age (C; T) | Gender (M : F) | Sample (C/T) | Intervention (C) | Intervention (T) | Outcome indicators | Acupuncture points | Course of treatment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wang, 2016 [ | C (7.8 ± 3.5) | C (27 : 22) | 49/49 | Rehabilitation training | C + acupuncture and tuina + music therapy | CARS; ABC | Shenting (GV 24), Benshen (GB 13), Sishencong (EX-HN1), Touwei (ST 8), Shangxing (GV 23), Naohu (GV 17), Fengchi (GB 20), Shenmen (HT 7), Neiguan (PC 6), Laogong (PC 8), Zhongwan (CV 12), Guanyuan (CV 4), and Qihai (CV 6) | Once/day |
|
| ||||||||
| Wang, 2018 [ | C (4.24 ± 2.16) | C (15 : 30) | 45/45 | Rehabilitation training | C + scalp acupuncture | ABC | Shen Ting (GV 24), Sishencong (EX-HN1), and Benshen (GB13) | 3 times/week, with a pause of 15 days after 10 times; 30 times in total |
|
| ||||||||
| Tang and Yuan, 2020 [ | C (2–9) | C (17 : 18) | 35/35 | Structured education model training | C + acupuncture | CARS; subitems of ABC | Zhi tri-needles (Shenting (GV 24), Benshen (GB 13) | Once/day, no less than 3 times a week; |
|
| ||||||||
| Zhang et al., 2019 [ | C (2–5) | C (25 : 5) | 30/30 | Sensory integration training and exercise intervention | C + scalp acupuncture | CARS; ABC; subitems of ABC | Si Shen needles (four points located at 1.5 inches on the Baihui (GV 20)), brain tri-needles (Naohu (GV 17), Naokong (GB 19)), temporal tri-needles (the three acupuncture points are located 2 cuns above the tip of the ear and 1 cun on the left and right sides), Zhi tri-needles (Shenting (GV 24), Benshen (GB 13) | Once/day for 6 consecutive months |
|
| ||||||||
| Dang et al., 2020 [ | C (3–6) | C (34 : 9) | 43/43 | Rehabilitation training | C + acupuncture | ABC; CARS | Baihui (GV 20), Sishen needles (four points located at 1.5 inches on the Baihui (GV 20)), temporal tri-needles (the three acupuncture points are located 2 cuns above the tip of the ear and 1 cun on the left and right sides), brain tri-needles (Naohu (GV 17), Naokong (GB 19)), Zhi tri-needles (Shenting (GV 24), Benshen (GB 13) | Once/day, continuous treatment for 6 days, 1 day off; total treatment for 6 months |
|
| ||||||||
| Zeng and Ou-yang, 2017 [ | C (3–7.5) | C (19 : 8) | 27/27 | Rehabilitation training | C + acupuncture | CARS; ABC | Sishencong (EX-HN1), Shenting (GV 24), Benshen (GB 13), Yingtang (GV 29), Naohu (GV 17), Naokong (GB 19), language area 1, language zone 2, and language zone 3 | Three times a week, 1 month is the course of treatment, 4 consecutive courses of treatment |
|
| ||||||||
| He et al, 2020 [ | C (4–8) | C (27 : 13) | 40/41 | Rehabilitation training | C + scalp acupuncture | Subitems of ABC | Sishencong (EX-HN1), Benshen (GB 13), Yingtang (GV 29), Naohu (GV 17), Naokong (GB 19), language area 1, language zone 2 and language zone 3 | 3 times a week, 1 month is the course of treatment, 4 consecutive courses of treatment |
|
| ||||||||
| lv et al., 2018 [ | C (3–9.4) | C (41 : 8) | 49/49 | Rehabilitation training | C + acupuncture and tuina | CARS; ABC | Sishencong (EX-HN1), Benshen (GB 13), Shenting (GV 24), Touwei (ST 8), Naohu (GV 17), Shenmen (HT 7), Neiguan (PC 6), and Laogong (PC 8) | Once/day, 5 days/week, 10 times is the course of treatment; 6 months is the total time of treatment |
|
| ||||||||
| Zhao et al., 2020 [ | C (2.5–8) | C (33 : 17) | 50/50 | Rehabilitation training and special education | C + TCM treatment (including acupuncture) | CRAS; ABC | Baihui (GV 20), Sishen needles (four points located at 1.5 inches on the Baihui (GV 20)), Dingshen needles (Yingtang (GV 29), Yangbai (GB 14) | Once/day, 6 days/week; 3 months of treatment in total |
|
| ||||||||
| Yuan et al., 2013 [ | C (5 ± 3) | C (22 : 8) | 30/30 | Rehabilitation training | C + scalp acupuncture | CARS | Zhi tri-needles (Shenting (GV 24), Benshen (GB 13) | Once/day, 6 days of treatment per week, 3 months as a course of treatment; 1 course in total |
|
| ||||||||
| Liu, 2017 [ | C (2–8) | C (22 : 8) | 30/30 | Rehabilitation training after acupuncture | Rehabilitation training with acupuncture | CARS | Sishen needles (four points located at 1.5 inches on the Baihui (GV 20)), Dingshen needles (Yingtang (GV 29), Yangbai (GB 14) | Once/day, 6 days/week; 3 months of treatment in total |
|
| ||||||||
| Wong et al., 2010 [ | C (9.56 ± 4.22) | C (22 : 3) | 25/30 | Rehabilitation training + sham acupuncture | Rehabilitation training + electroacupuncture | Subitems of ABC; subitems of RDLS WeeFIM; | Sishencong (EX-HN1), Yingtang (GV 29), Shenmen (HT 7), Taichong (LR 3), ear naodian (AT 3), ear shenmen (TF 4), and San yinjiao (SP 6) | 30 min for each time, once/day for 4 weeks |
|
| ||||||||
| Kong et al., 2018 [ | C (6.8 ± 0.9) | C (19 : 11) | 30/30 | Rehabilitation training | C + acupuncture | CARS; ABC | Brain tri-needles (Naohu (GV 17), Naokong (GB 19) | Once/day, 30 min for each time; 4-month treatment in total |
|
| ||||||||
| Wong et al., 2014 [ | C (8.75 ± 4.62) | 9/12 | Rehabilitation training | TAC (tongue acupuncture) | Subitems of RDLS, WeeFIM | (TAC #1 run Ze, TAC #2 Guan Zhu) and (TAC #3 Tian men, TAC#4 and TAC #5 Di You') | 5 times a week for 8 weeks | |
|
| ||||||||
| Wong and Sun, 2010 [ | C (6 ± 5.92) | 25/25 | Sham TAC | TAC (tongue acupuncture) | RDLS, FIM | (TAC #1 run Ze, TAC #2 Guan Zhu) and (TAC #3 Tian men, TAC#4 and TAC #5 Di You') | 5 times a week for 8 weeks | |
|
| ||||||||
| Li et al., 2017 [ | C (30 : 15) | 45/45 | Rehabilitation training | C + acupuncture | ABC | Shuigou (GV26), Fengfu (GV 16), Chengjiang (CV 24), Jiache (ST 6), Shaoshang (LU 11), Daling (PC 7), Yinbai (SP 1), Haiquan (EX-HN11), Laogong (PC 8), Shenmai (BL 62), Shangxing (GV 23), Huiyin (CV 1), and Quchi (LI 11) | 3 times a week, with a 20-day interval after 10 times; 30 treatments in total constituted a course of treatment. The patients were treated for 3 courses | |
Figure 4Forest plot showing MD (with 95% CI) for CARS of included studies comparing the experimental group with the control group. Childhood autism rating scale (CARS).
Figure 5Forest plot showing MD (with 95% CI) for ABC of included studies comparing the experimental group with the control group. ABC: autism behavior checklist.
Figure 6Forest plot showing MD (with 95% CI) for subitems of autism behavior check list (ABC) of included studies comparing the experimental group with the control group. ABC, subitems of ABC included sensory, relating, language, body and object use, and social/self-help. (a) Sensory, (b) relating, (c) language, (d) body and object use, and (e) social/self-help.
Figure 7Forest plot showing MD (with 95% CI) for subitems of Reynell developmental language scale (RDLS) of included studies comparing the experimental group with the control group. Subitems of RDLS included comprehension and expression ages. (a) Comprehension age; (b) expression age.
Figure 8Forest plot showing MD (with 95% CI) for WeeFIM of included studies comparing the experimental group with the control group. WeeFIM: functional independence measure of children.
Figure 9Funnel graph for ABC of included studies. ABC: autism behavior checklist.