| Literature DB >> 34765004 |
Shourui Huang1, Ling Li1, Jiali Liu1, Xiujuan Li2, Qingyang Shi1, Ying Li3, Yanping Liu4, Mingxiu Li5, Li Ma6, Liang Ning7, Xiaoyang Liao8, Xihui Ying4, Weiye Cai5, Fuyu Yang9, Tengfei Wang10, Ru Guo8, Weijie Ma1, Wenzhu Chen11, Jin Chen1, Xin Sun1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Acupoint sensitization is considered an important factor in the efficacy of acupoint therapy. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of acupressure in the prevention of stable angina pectoris using acupoints with different pressure-pain sensitivities.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34765004 PMCID: PMC8577890 DOI: 10.1155/2021/7228033
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Figure 1Flowchart of enrolment, randomization, and follow-up. HSG: high-sensitivity group; LSG: low-sensitivity group.
Baseline characteristics of included patients.
| Characteristic1 | Group | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| LSG ( | HSG ( | Overall ( | |
|
| 66.22 ± 10.02 | 66.06 ± 9.11 | 66.13 ± 9.51 |
|
| 48.0 (51.6%) | 63.0 (57.8%) | 111 (55.0%) |
|
| 86.0 (92.5%) | 101.0 (92.7%) | 187 (92.6%) |
|
| 23.34 ± 3.34 | 23.14 ± 3.17 | 23.23 ± 3.24 |
|
| |||
| Education | |||
| Basic to junior high school | 73 (78.5%) | 91 (83.5%) | 164 (81.2%) |
| High school and above | 20 (21.5%) | 18 (16.5%) | 38 (18.8%) |
|
| 27 (29.0%) | 26 (23.9%) | 53 (26.2%) |
|
| 16 (17.2%) | 16 (14.7%) | 32 (15.8%) |
|
| 8 (8.6%) | 14 (12.8%) | 22 (10.9%) |
|
| 9 (9.7%) | 14 (12.8%) | 23 (11.4%) |
|
| 39 (41.9%) | 49 (45.0%) | 88 (43.6%) |
|
| 17 (18.3%) | 25 (22.9%) | 42 (20.8%) |
|
| 35 (37.6%) | 40 (36.7%) | 75 (37.1%) |
|
| 19 (20.4%) | 13 (11.9%) | 32 (15.8%) |
|
| 17 (18.3%) | 27 (24.8%) | 44 (21.8%) |
|
| 51 (54.8%) | 53 (48.6%) | 104 (51.5%) |
|
| 4 (4.3%) | 4 (3.7%) | 8 (4.0%) |
|
| 24 (25.8%) | 30 (27.5%) | 54 (26.7%) |
|
| 5.52 ± 4.48 | 6.34 ± 5.81 | 5.96 ± 5.24 |
|
| |||
| Nitroglycerin consumption | |||
| None | 62 (66.7%) | 76 (69.7%) | 138 (68.3%) |
| <3 times/week | 23 (24.7%) | 27 (24.8%) | 50 (24.8%) |
| 3–12 times/week | 7 (7.5%) | 6 (5.5%) | 13 (6.4%) |
| ≥12 times/week | 1 (1.1%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (0.5%) |
|
| |||
| CCS grade | |||
| Level I | 45 (48.4%) | 49 (45.0%) | 94 (46.5%) |
| Level II | 40 (43.0%) | 45 (41.3%) | 85 (42.1%) |
| Level III | 7 (7.5%) | 14 (12.8%) | 21 (10.4%) |
| Level IV | 1 (1.1%) | 1 (0.9%) | 2 (1.00%) |
|
| |||
| SAQ score | |||
| Physical limitations | 52.38 ± 18.81 | 51.44 ± 19.36 | 51.87 ± 19.06 |
| Angina stability | 51.62 ± 20.12 | 54.82 ± 21.91 | 53.34 ± 21.12 |
| Angina frequency | 80.08 ± 14.37 | 77.50 ± 16.53 | 78.69 ± 15.59 |
| Treatment satisfaction | 68.75 ± 20.54 | 68.81 ± 21.72 | 68.78 ± 21.14 |
| Quality of life | 58.87 ± 24.57 | 62.61 ± 23.20 | 60.89 ± 23.85 |
SD: standard deviation; CHD: coronary heart disease; CCS: Canadian Cardiovascular Society; SAQ: Seattle Angina Questionnaire; 1mean ± SD or frequency (%); 2Wilcoxon rank sum test; Pearson's chi-squared test; Fisher's exact test.
Between-group comparison of the frequency of angina attacks at different study phases.
| Study phase | Frequency of attacks (mean ± SD) | Adjusted model1 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HSG | LSG | HSG vs. LSG | ||
| IRR (95% CI)2 |
| |||
| Baseline | 6.31 ± 5.75 | 5.49 ± 4.55 | — | — |
| Week 4 | 2.96 ± 3.42 | 3.69 ± 3.88 | 0.691 (0.569, 0.839) | 0.002 |
| Week 8 | 2.81 ± 3.48 | 3.60 ± 3.68 | 0.692 (0.568, 0.841) | 0.002 |
HSG: high-sensitivity group; LSG: low-sensitivity group; IRR: incidence rate ratio; CI: confidence interval. 1Adjusted model was constructed by a Poisson mixed model with treatment, time, and interaction between treatment and time as the fixed effects and centre and individuals as the random effects. 2Compared with baseline, the difference of change of angina attacks between groups was reflected by the incidence rate ratio.
Figure 2Change in the frequency of angina attacks during the study. HSG: high-sensitivity group; LSG: low-sensitivity group; ΔHSG: changes of the number of angina attacks from baseline to week 4 in the high-sensitivity group; and ΔLSG: changes of the number of angina attacks from baseline to week 4 in the low-sensitivity group.
Figure 3Subgroup analysis of associations between angina attack and intervention. IRR: incidence rate ratio; CI: confidence interval; BMI: body mass index; and CHD: coronary heart disease.
Figure 4Change of PPT between groups from baseline to week 4. HSG: high-sensitivity group; LSG: low-sensitivity group; PPT: pressure-pain threshold; and error bars indicate the standard error of the mean.