4.4 Review

Does auriculotherapy have therapeutic effectiveness? An overview of systematic reviews

Journal

COMPLEMENTARY THERAPIES IN CLINICAL PRACTICE
Volume 33, Issue -, Pages 61-70

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ctcp.2018.08.005

Keywords

Auriculotherapy; Auricular acupuncture; Acupressure; Pain; Insomnia; Smoking cessation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and purpose: Auriculotherapy is a therapeutic technique used for a wide variety of conditions. Nevertheless, similarly to any health related intervention, the clinical use of this therapy requires scientific evidence of effectiveness in order to support its rational use. The main goal of this article is to critically analyze published literature on auriculotherapy and to provide an overview of the effectiveness of this technique in the management of health disorders. Methods: The inventory of published reviews on this subject was carried out in November 2017, by assessing the following computerized databases: PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EBMR, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, CINAHL Plus NRC and Science Direct. Were only considered the systematic reviews based on meta-analysis with high methodological quality described according to AMSTAR (Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews). The eligible articles were systematically reviewed to find out in which health conditions auriculotherapy can be used with effectiveness. Results: A total of 14 reviews were eligible according to the inclusion and exclusion criterions. Those reviews were focused on the management of insomnia, smoking cessation and pain, within the clinical scope of Neurology, Orthopaedics and Rheumatology. Conclusions: Auriculotherapy has shown to have positive effects while associated to conventional treatments of insomnia, chronic and acute pain. Further well designed studies are required to evaluate the effectiveness of this technique in the treatment of other health conditions.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available