| Literature DB >> 34956397 |
Zelin Yu1, Mengxia Shen1, Wenfang Shang1, Jiangxia Wu1, Lihua Xuan2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Investigate the optimum time of acupuncture treatment in peripheral facial paralysis in order to provide evidence for clinical treatment.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34956397 PMCID: PMC8694981 DOI: 10.1155/2021/4221955
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Math Methods Med ISSN: 1748-670X Impact factor: 2.238
Search strategy for each database.
| Database | Search strategy |
|---|---|
| PubMed | #1 “acupuncture” [MeSH terms] OR “acupuncture” [all fields] |
|
| |
| EMBASE | #1. “acupuncture”/exp OR “acupuncture” OR “moxibustion”/exp OR “moxibustion” |
|
| |
| Cochrane Library | #1 acupuncture (word variations have been searched) |
|
| |
| Wanfang | #1 acupuncture or acupuncture therapy |
|
| |
| CNKI | #1 acupuncture or acupuncture therapy |
Figure 1Study selection.
Characteristics of included trials and participants.
| Included trials | Intervention | Participants | Treatment duration | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Acute stage | Quiescent recovery stage | Recovery stage | Sample size, | Mean age, years ± SD | Men, | ||
| Liang 2004 | ACU; ACU+D; D | ACU; ACU+D | 480 | 40.1 ± 15.1 | 249 (51.9%) | 30 d | |
| Wu 2006 | ACU+D | ACU+D | 150 | 41.0 ± 17.2 | 71 (47.3%) | 60 d | |
| Shen 2009 | ACU+D | 279 | 46.7 ± 31.3 | 141 (50.5%) | 60 d | ||
| Qin 2013 | ACU+D | ACU+D | ACU+D | 120 | 43.1 ± 15.2 | 57 (50.9%) | 30 d |
| Chen 2018 | ACU; D | 86 | 47.6 ± 3.4 | 47 (54.7%) | 10 d | ||
| Yang2018 | ACU; D | 84 | 47.2 ± 2.8 | 51 (60.7%) | 36 d | ||
| Dong2018 | ACU; D | 70 | 40.5 ± 5.0 | 44 (62.9%) | 28 d | ||
| Mao 2019 | ACU; ACU+D | ACU+D | 90 | 42.2 ± 16.7 | 43 (47.8%) | 30 d | |
| Wang 2019 | ACU | ACU+D | 100 | 42.0 ± 1.3 | 57 (57.0%) | 30 d | |
| Zhou 2019 | ACU+D | ACU+D | 60 | 41.7 ± 12.5 | 34 (56.7%) | 30 d | |
| Song 2019 | ACU | ACU | 62 | 45.0 ± 5.2 | 37 (59.7%) | ||
| Li 2011 | ACU | ACU | ACU | 891 | 40.5 ± 15.4 | 469 (52.6%) | 28 d |
| Yang 2014 | ACU; D | 120 | 41.7 ± 10.6 | 70 (58.3%) | 28 d | ||
| Liu 2017 | ACU; D | 84 | 46.5 ± 16.2 | 40 (47.6%) | 28 d | ||
| Wang 2018 | ACU+D | ACU+D | 134 | 37.7 ± 12.7 | 63 (47.0%) | 28 d | |
Figure 2Risk of bias ratings.
Figure 3Sensitivity analysis.
Figure 4Meta-analysis results of acupuncture compared with drugs for acute peripheral facial paralysis.
Figure 5L'Abbe graph.
Figure 6Galbraith plot.
Subgroup analysis of acupuncture for peripheral facial paralysis in acute stage or nonacute stage.
| Variable | No. of trials | No. of participants | Cure rate, RR (95%) | Heterogeneity | Subgroup differences | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cured | Total | |||||
| Published year | ||||||
| ≤2013 | 4 | 766 | 1532 | 1.26 [1.06, 1.50] |
| 0.28 |
| >2013 | 3 | 142 | 254 | 1.61 [1.08, 2.40] |
| |
| Intervention∗ | ||||||
| ACU | 2 | 484 | 1047 | 1.17 [0.96, 1.43] |
| 0.18 |
| ACU+drugs | 6 | 424 | 739 | 1.49 [1.12, 1.98] |
| |
| Sample size | ||||||
| <150 | 4 | 190 | 366 | 1.71 [1.25, 2.35] |
| 0.02 |
| ≥150 | 3 | 718 | 1420 | 1.15 [1.06, 1.25] |
| |
| Acupoint | ||||||
| Acupoint1 | 2 | 298 | 529 | 1.20 [0.94, 1.54] |
| 0.48 |
| Acupoint2 | 3 | 493 | 1063 | 1.69 [0.99, 2.87] |
| |
| Acupoint3 | 2 | 117 | 194 | 1.36 [1.08, 1.71] |
| |
| ACU time | ||||||
| Same | 3 | 718 | 1420 | 1.15 [1.06, 1.25] |
| 0.02 |
| Vary | 4 | 190 | 366 | 1.71 [1.25, 2.35] |
| |
Note: Acupoint1: principle point; Acupoint2: principle point+supplementary points based on different symptoms; Acupoint3: principle point+supplementary points based on different syndromes. ∗ Fangrong et al. [12] studied both acupuncture and acupuncture in addition to drug in different stages. So this study was counted in two groups and added up to 8.
Figure 7Funnel plot of effective rate.
Figure 8Funnel plot of cure rate.