4.4 Article

Acupuncture of different treatment frequency in postprandial distress syndrome: A pilot randomized clinical trial

Journal

NEUROGASTROENTEROLOGY AND MOTILITY
Volume 32, Issue 6, Pages -

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/nmo.13812

Keywords

acupuncture; functional dyspepsia; postprandial distress syndrome; randomized controlled trial; treatment frequency

Funding

  1. Beijing Municipal Science & Technology Commission [Z161100000516007]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background The evidence for different frequencies of acupuncture treatment in postprandial distress syndrome (PDS) is insufficient. This study determined whether 3 sessions per week of acupuncture treatment are superior to 1 session per week for symptomatic outcomes in PDS. Methods This 16-week randomized clinical pilot trial was conducted in an outpatient setting in China. Patients with PDS were randomly assigned to receive 3 sessions per week of acupuncture (group H) or 1 session per week of acupuncture (group L) for 4 weeks. The primary outcome was the complete elimination of core symptoms at week 4. Secondary outcomes included overall treatment efficacy, dyspepsia symptoms, quality of life, anxiety, and depression. Key Results Sixty patients were randomized of whom 53 (88.3%) completed this trial. The complete elimination rate of core symptoms was 26.7% (95% CI 12.3%-45.9%) in group H and 10.0% (95% CI 2.1%-26.5%) in group L at week 4 (P = .095). There was a significant difference between H and group L at weeks 8, 12, and 16 (P = .038, .02, and .02). All secondary outcomes were better in group H at all time points. No serious adverse events occurred in either groups. Conclusions This trial showed that acupuncture, at 3 sessions per week, tended to improve symptoms and the quality of life among patients with PDS as compared to once a week. Acupuncture treatment for 4 weeks was feasible and safe. A larger sample, multicenter, randomized controlled trial of acupuncture for PDS appears to be justified in the future.

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