| Literature DB >> 34457022 |
Wan-Zhen Yu1, Chin-Ming Huang2, Hui-Ping Ng3,4, Yu-Chen Lee1,5,6.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the difference in efficacy between distal and proximal acupoints in treating knee osteoarthritis.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34457022 PMCID: PMC8387169 DOI: 10.1155/2021/4827123
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Figure 1Pulse diagnosis in TCM illustrating the relationship between radial pulses and the corresponding visceral organs. Right cun (lung, chest); right guan (stomach, spleen); right chi (kidney, lower abdomen); left cun (heart); left guan (liver, gallbladder); and left chi (kidney, lower abdomen).
Figure 2The study flow diagram.
Figure 3The study procedure and timeline. Each participant underwent a baseline assessment through a questionnaire. VAS, pulse assessment, and knee ROM tests were performed before and after acupuncture.
Distal acupoints, proximal acupoints, and sham acupoints were used in this study.
| Group | Acupoints | Location [ | Application |
|---|---|---|---|
| Distal (DG) | On the lateral aspect of the elbow, at the midpoint of the line connecting LU5 with the lateral epicondyle of the humerus. | Bilateral, perpendicular insertion, 15–30 mm depth | |
| On the anteromedial aspect of the elbow, just anterior to the medial epicondyle of the humerus, at the same level as the cubital crease. | Bilateral, perpendicular insertion, 15–30 mm depth | ||
| On the posterior aspect of the elbow, in the depression 1 B-cun proximal to the prominence of the olecranon. | Bilateral, oblique insertion (30°), 15–30 mm depth | ||
|
| |||
| Proximal (PG) | On the fibular aspect of the leg, in the depression anterior and distal to the head of the fibula. | Bilateral, perpendicular insertion, 15–30 mm depth | |
| On the tibial aspect of the leg, in the depression between the inferior border of the medial condyle of the tibia and the medial border of the tibia. | Bilateral, perpendicular insertion, 15–30 mm depth | ||
| Above the knee, in the depression of the midpoint of the superior patellar border. | Bilateral, oblique insertion (30°), 15–30 mm depth | ||
|
| |||
| Sham (SG) | On the upper abdomen, 4 B-cun superior to the center of the umbilicus, on the anterior median line. | Unilateral, perpendicular nonpenetrating insertion. | |
| On the upper abdomen, 4 B-cun superior to the center of the umbilicus, 2 B-cun lateral to the anterior median line. | Bilateral, perpendicular nonpenetrating insertion. | ||
Figure 4Acupoints used in this study (a) and a circular intermediate ring used (b) for all acupoints.
Figure 5Knee ROM measured with a goniometer.
Figure 6(a) Assessing each pulse on the wrist of the participants using the pulse detection sensor pen attached to the pulse sphygmograph; (b) graphical presentation of SE13–50Hz of left chi pulses before acupuncture; and (c) graphical presentation of SE13–50Hz of left chi pulses after acupuncture.
Demographic characteristics of the study participants.
| All | PG | DG | SG | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male | 21 | 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Female | 71 | 21 | 24 | 26 |
| Age (years) | 65.32 ± 10.02 | 64.84 ± 10.14 | 64.73 ± 9.57 | 66.35 ± 10.56 |
| Height (m) | 1.59 ± .08 | 1.60 ± .08 | 1.58 ± .07 | 1.58 ± .08 |
| Weight (kg) | 63.00 ± 12.66 | 62.55 ± 11.86 | 63.18 ± 13.50 | 63.26 ± 13.01 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 24.91 ± 4.30 | 24.41 ± 4.69 | 25.09 ± 4.12 | 25.25 ± 4.15 |
Values are presented as mean ± SD. PG = proximal acupoints group; DG = distal acupoints group; SG = sham acupoints group; BMI = body mass index.
Comparing the differences in BMI, WOMAC, VAS, and active and passive knee ROM in the three groups before the intervention using ANOVA.
| PG | DG | SG | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BMI (kg/m2) | 24.41 ± 4.69 | 25.09 ± 4.12 | 25.25 ± 4.15 | 0.72 |
| WOMAC (%) | 27.39 ± 16.99 | 28.4 ± 16.97 | 32.58 ± 18.58 | 0.47 |
| VAS | 3.74 ± 1.44 | 3.67 ± 1.67 | 3.81 ± 1.82 | 0.95 |
| Active ROM (°) | 122.84 ± 11.89 | 121.27 ± 10.41 | 119.42 ± 13.01 | 0.53 |
| Passive ROM (°) | 126 ± 10.71 | 125.87 ± 8.65 | 124.71 ± 11.53 | 0.87 |
Values are presented as mean ± SD. PG = proximal acupoints group; DG = distal acupoints group; SG = sham acupoints group; BMI = body mass index.
Affected TCM meridian distribution in the participants.
| Group | Gallbladder (%) | Spleen (%) | Liver (%) | Kidney (%) | Bladder (%) | Stomach (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All | 29.3 | 76.1 | 63.0 | 18.5 | 16.3 | 47.8 |
| PG | 19.4 | 77.4 | 64.5 | 29.0 | 19.4 | 54.8 |
| DG | 23.3 | 86.7 | 60.0 | 6.7 | 6.7 | 50.0 |
| SG | 45.2 | 64.5 | 64.5 | 19.4 | 22.6 | 38.7 |
PG = proximal acupoints group; DG = distal acupoints group; SG = sham acupoints group.
Figure 7Pain scores compared before and after intervention.
VAS differences between the three groups, post-VAS comparisons, and post hoc analysis.
| PG | DG | SG | Post hoc tests | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Post-VAS | 2.00 ± 1.63 | 1.40 ± 1.67 | 2.97 ± 2.06 | 0.001 | SG > DG |
| VAS difference | −1.74 ± 1.12 | −2.27 ± 1.55 | −0.84 ± 1.13 | 0.001 | PG > SG; DG > SG |
Values are presented as mean ± SD. PG = proximal acupoints group; DG = distal acupoints group; SG = sham acupoints group.
Figure 8Active and passive knee ROM before and after intervention.
Active and passive ROM differences between the three groups, postintervention comparisons, and post hoc analysis.
| PG | DG | SG | Post hoc tests | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Postintervention active ROM | 122.97 ± 23.29 | 125.20 ± 6.96 | 119.03 ± 12.56 | 0.31 | Not applied |
| Active ROM difference | 0.13 ± 16.38 | 3.93 ± 5.64 | −0.39 ± 3.40 | 0.21 | Not applied |
| Postintervention passive ROM | 129.23 ± 11.67 | 128.43 ± 7.53 | 123.94 ± 11.03 | 0.10 | Not applied |
| Passive ROM difference | 3.23 ± 5.21 | 2.57 ± 4.08 | −0.77 ± 3.53 | 0.001 | DG > SG; PG > SG |
Values are presented as mean ± SD. PG = proximal acupoints group; DG = distal acupoints group; SG = sham acupoints group.
Spectral energy parameters of the radial pulse wave in PG.
| Parameter | Position | Preintervention | Postintervention | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SE0–10Hz | Left | 2.898 | 3.559 |
|
| Left | 2.629 | 2.562 | 0.82 | |
| Left | 2.046 | 2.337 | 0.43 | |
| Right c | 3.041 | 3.679 | 0.07 | |
| Right | 2.691 | 3.324 | 0.08 | |
| Right | 1.947 | 2.124 | 0.52 | |
|
| ||||
| SE13–50Hz | Left | 9.688 | 9.788 | 0.97 |
| Left | 1.101 | 8.375 | 0.24 | |
| Left | 1.017 | 5.891 |
| |
| Right c | 1.288 | 1.455 | 0.63 | |
| Right | 1.967 | 1.881 | 0.74 | |
| Right | 8.860 | 1.551 | 0.40 | |
Values are presented as mean ± SD. SE = spectral energy; E = exponential notation.
Spectral energy parameters of the radial pulse wave in DG.
| Parameter | Position | Preintervention | Postintervention | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SE0–10Hz | Left | 3.144 | 3.871 | 0.07 |
| Left | 2.449 | 3.243 |
| |
| Left | 2.738 | 2.405 | 0.37 | |
| Right c | 2.884 | 3.643 | 0.11 | |
| Right | 3.441 | 3.547 | 0.86 | |
| Right | 3.025 | 2.756 | 0.43 | |
|
| ||||
| SE13–50Hz | Left | 1.313 | 1.196 | 0.74 |
| Left | 9.398 | 1.279 | 0.10 | |
| Left | 1.515 | 1.181 | 0.12 | |
| Right c | 1.865 | 1.500 | 0.17 | |
| Right | 2.307 | 2.000 | 0.68 | |
| Right | 1.391 | 1.009 | 0.24 | |
Values are presented as mean ± SD. SE = spectral energy; E = exponential notation.
Spectral energy parameters of the radial pulse wave in SG.
| Parameter | Position | Preintervention | Postintervention | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SE0–10Hz | Left | 3.405 | 3.219 | 0.67 |
| Left | 2.927 | 3.126 | 0.57 | |
| Left | 2.606 | 2.647 | 0.84 | |
| Right c | 3.633 | 3.451 | 0.63 | |
| Right | 3.178 | 3.187 | 1.00 | |
| Right | 2.545 | 2.378 | 0.56 | |
|
| ||||
| SE13–50Hz | Left | 1.291 | 1.030 | 0.24 |
| Left | 1.463 | 1.188 | 0.30 | |
| Left | 1.191 | 1.157 | 0.87 | |
| Right c | 2.377 | 1.720 | 0.14 | |
| Right | 2.725 | 2.503 | 0.42 | |
| Right | 1.425 | 1.209 | 0.43 | |
Values are presented as mean ± SD. SE = spectral energy; E = exponential notation.