4.3 Article

Comparative efficacy and safety of NSAIDs-controlled acupuncture in the treatment of patients with primary dysmenorrhoea: a Bayesian network meta-analysis

Journal

JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL MEDICAL RESEARCH
Volume 47, Issue 1, Pages 19-30

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0300060518800609

Keywords

Primary dysmenorrhoea; acupuncture; non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; randomized controlled trial; network meta-analysis; electroacupuncture

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Acupuncture and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are used frequently to treat primary dysmenorrhoea. However, it is unclear whether this treatment greatly reduces the risk of primary dysmenorrhoea. Methods Eight databases were searched up to January 2018. Pair-wise and network meta-analyses were conducted to synthesize data from eligible studies. Results Seventeen randomized controlled trials were included. The following acupuncture types showed more efficacy than NSAIDs in reducing primary dysmenorrhoea risk: traditional acupuncture (odds ratio [OR]=6.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.60-20.0), eye acupuncture (OR=3.50, 95% CI 1.40-8.90), wrist-ankle acupuncture (OR=6.00, 95% CI 1.30-32.0), superficial acupuncture (OR= 5.10, 95% CI 1.20-26.0), moxibustion (OR=7.70, 95% CI 2.90-25.0), electroacupuncture (OR=23.0, 95% CI 4.80-130), ear acupuncture (OR=13.0, 95% CI 2.80-100) and abdominal acupuncture (OR=5.30, 95% CI 2.10-16.0). Surface under the cumulative ranking curve values were traditional acupuncture (53.0%), eye acupuncture (22.0%), wrist-ankle acupuncture (81.5%), superficial acupuncture (50.0%), moxibustion (57.8%), electroacupuncture (99.9%), ear acupuncture (41.6%) and abdominal acupuncture (44.1%). Conclusion Acupuncture is more efficacious than NSAIDs in reducing primary dysmenorrhoea risk. Acupuncture, particularly electroacupuncture, can decrease the risk of primary dysmenorrhoea.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available