4.6 Article

Auricular Acupressure on Specific Points for Hemodialysis Patients with Insomnia: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 10, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0122724

关键词

-

资金

  1. Project of Research Studio of Famous Old TCM Practitioners Experience Heritage, State Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine [2012KT1301]
  2. Research Project for Practice Development of National TCM Clinical Research Bases, P.R. China [201007005]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives To assess the feasibility and acceptability of a randomized controlled trial compared auricular acupressure (AA) on specific acupoints with AA on non-specific acupoints for treating maintenance hemodialysis (MHD) patients with insomnia. Methods Sixty three (63) eligible subjects were randomly assigned into either AA group received AA on specific acupoints (n=32), or sham AA (SAA) group received AA on points irrelevant to insomnia treatment (n=31) for eight weeks. All participants were followed up for 12 weeks after treatments. The primary outcome was clinical response at eight weeks after randomization, defined as a reduction of Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) global score by 3 points and more. Results Fifty-eight (58) participants completed the trial and five dropped out. Twenty participants in AA group (62.5%) and ten in SAA group (32.3%) responded to the eight-week interventions (chi(2) = 5.77, P = 0.02). PSQI global score declined 3.75 +/- 4.36 (95% CI -5.32, -2.18) and 2.26 +/- 3.89 (95% CI -3.68, -0.83) in AA group and SAA group respectively. Three participants died during the follow-up period. No evidence supported their deaths were related to the AA intervention. No other adverse event was observed. Conclusion Feasibility and logistics of patient recruitment, randomization procedure, blinding approach, interventions application and outcome assessment had been tested in this pilot trial. The preliminary data appeared to show a favorable result on AA treatment. A full-scale trial is warranted.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据