Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 117
Filter
1.
BMJ Open ; 11(5): e044831, 2021 05 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34006548

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Contextual components of treatment previously associated with patient outcomes include the environment, therapeutic relationship and expectancies. Questions remain about which components are most important, how they influence outcomes and comparative effects across treatment approaches. We aimed to identify significant and strong contextual predictors of patient outcomes, test for psychological mediators and compare effects across three treatment approaches. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study with patient-reported and practitioner-reported questionnaire data (online or paper) collected at first consultation, 2 weeks and 3 months. SETTING: Physiotherapy, osteopathy and acupuncture clinics throughout the UK. PARTICIPANTS: 166 practitioners (65 physiotherapists, 46 osteopaths, 55 acupuncturists) were recruited via their professional organisations. Practitioners recruited 960 adult patients seeking treatment for low back pain (LBP). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was back-related disability. Secondary outcomes were pain and well-being. Contextual components measured were: therapeutic alliance; patient satisfaction with appointment systems, access, facilities; patients' treatment beliefs including outcome expectancies; practitioners' attitudes to LBP and practitioners' patient-specific outcome expectancies. The hypothesised mediators measured were: patient self-efficacy for pain management; patient perceptions of LBP and psychosocial distress. RESULTS: After controlling for baseline and potential confounders, statistically significant predictors of reduced back-related disability were: all three dimensions of stronger therapeutic alliance (goal, task and bond); higher patient satisfaction with appointment systems; reduced patient-perceived treatment credibility and increased practitioner-rated outcome expectancies. Therapeutic alliance over task (ηp2=0.10, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.14) and practitioner-rated outcome expectancies (ηp2=0.08, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.11) demonstrated the largest effect sizes. Patients' self-efficacy, LBP perceptions and psychosocial distress partially mediated these relationships. There were no interactions with treatment approach. CONCLUSIONS: Enhancing contextual components in musculoskeletal healthcare could improve patient outcomes. Interventions should focus on helping practitioners and patients forge effective therapeutic alliances with strong affective bonds and agreement on treatment goals and how to achieve them.


Subject(s)
Low Back Pain , Osteopathic Medicine , Osteopathic Physicians , Adult , Humans , Low Back Pain/therapy , Physical Therapy Modalities , Prospective Studies , Treatment Outcome
2.
Acupunct Med ; 39(4): 309-317, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33300369

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The degree to which the effects of acupuncture treatment vary between acupuncturists is unknown. We used a large individual patient dataset of trials of acupuncture for chronic pain to assess practitioner heterogeneity. METHODS: Individual patient data linked to identifiable acupuncturists were drawn from a dataset of 39 high-quality trials of acupuncture, where the comparators were either sham acupuncture or non-acupuncture controls, such as standard care or waitlist. Heterogeneity among acupuncturists was assessed by meta-analysis. RESULTS: A total of 1206 acupuncturists in 13 trials were included. Statistically significant heterogeneity was found in trials with sham-control groups (p < 0.0001) and non-acupuncture control groups (p <0.0001). However, the degree of heterogeneity was very small, with the observed distribution of treatment effects virtually overlapping that expected by chance. For instance, for non-acupuncture-controlled trials, the proportion of acupuncturists with effect sizes half a standard deviation greater or less than average was expected to be 34%, but was observed to be 37%. A limitation is that the trials included a relatively limited range of acupuncturists, mainly physician-acupuncturists. DISCUSSION: Although differences in effects between acupuncturists were greater than expected by chance, the degree of variation was small. This suggests that most chronic pain patients in clinical practice would have similar results to those reported in high-quality trials; comparably, we did not find evidence to suggest that greater standardization of acupuncture practice would improve outcomes. Further research needs to be conducted exploring variability using a sample of acupuncturists with a broader range of practice styles, training and experience.


Subject(s)
Acupuncture Therapy , Chronic Pain/therapy , Physicians/standards , Acupuncture Therapy/psychology , Acupuncture Therapy/standards , Clinical Trials as Topic , Humans , Physicians/psychology , Physicians/statistics & numerical data , Surveys and Questionnaires
3.
Acupunct Med ; 39(2): 83-90, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32571096

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In a recent individual patient data meta-analysis, acupuncture was found to be superior to sham and non-sham controls in patients with chronic pain. It has been suggested that a subgroup of patients has an exceptional response to acupuncture. We hypothesized the presence of exceptional acupuncture responders would lead to a different distribution of pain scores in acupuncture versus control groups, with the former being skewed to the right. METHODS: This individual patient data meta-analysis included 39 high-quality randomized trials of acupuncture for chronic headache, migraine, osteoarthritis, low back pain, neck pain and shoulder pain published before December 2015 (n = 20,827). In all, 25 involved sham acupuncture controls (n = 7097) and 25 non-acupuncture controls (n = 16,041). We analyzed the distribution of change scores and calculated the difference in the skewness statistic-which assesses asymmetry in the data distribution-between acupuncture and either sham or non-acupuncture control groups. We then entered the difference in skewness along with standard error into a meta-analysis. FINDINGS: Control groups were more right-skewed than acupuncture groups, although this difference was very small. The difference in skew was 0.124 for non-acupuncture-controlled trials (p = 0.047) and 0.141 for sham-controlled trials (p = 0.029). In a pre-specified sensitivity analysis excluding three trials with outlying results known a priori, the difference in skew between acupuncture and sham was no longer statistically significant (p = 0.2). CONCLUSION: We did not find evidence to support the notion that there are exceptional acupuncture responders. The challenge remains to identify features of chronic pain patients that can be used to distinguish those that have a good response to acupuncture treatment.


Subject(s)
Acupuncture Therapy , Chronic Pain/therapy , Humans , Low Back Pain/therapy , Neck Pain/therapy , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Treatment Outcome
4.
Med Acupunct ; 32(6): 385-387, 2020 Dec 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33362893

ABSTRACT

Background: The Acupuncture Trialists' Collaboration has updated its individual patient data meta-analysis of acupuncture for chronic pain originally published in 2012. The updated meta-analysis, published in 2018, now includes raw trial data from 39 trials and 20,827 patients. The overall effect of acupuncture, and the effect of sham acupuncture controls, was evaluated. Results: For 4 conditions, acupuncture has statistically significantly better effects than sham acupuncture (effect sizes 0.16-0.19 [small]). When compared with usual care controls, effect sizes are larger (0.44-0.63 [moderate]). Sham acupuncture has a considerable therapeutic effect; true acupuncture compared with usual care has an effect size of around 0.5, of which 60% is ascribed to nonspecific context effects plus sham, and the remaining 40% to the specific benefit of true acupuncture. Investigators also determined no significant variation in effect related to any acupuncture characteristic; that acupuncture's effect size drops against a high-intensity control; and that only 10%-15% of acupuncture's benefit is lost at 12 months post-treatment. Conclusions: Acupuncture is more than a placebo for chronic pain, and both specific and nonspecific effects can be distinguished in a meta-analysis of appropriate size.

6.
J Clin Med ; 8(8)2019 Jul 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31370200

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Depression is commonly treated with anti-depressant medication and/or psychological interventions. Patients with depression are common users of complementary therapies, such as acupuncture, either as a replacement for, or adjunct to, their conventional treatments. This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the effectiveness of acupuncture in major depressive disorder. METHODS: A search of English (Medline, PsychINFO, Google Scholar, and CINAL), Chinese (China National Knowledge Infrastructure Database (CNKI) and Wanfang Database), and Korean databases was undertaken from 1980 to November 2018 for clinical trials using manual, electro, or laser acupuncture. RESULTS: Twenty-nine studies including 2268 participants were eligible and included in the meta-analysis. Twenty-two trials were undertaken in China and seven outside of China. Acupuncture showed clinically significant reductions in the severity of depression compared to usual care (Hedges (g) = 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18 to 0.63), sham acupuncture (g = 0.55, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.79), and as an adjunct to anti-depressant medication (g = 0.84, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.07). A significant correlation between an increase in the number of acupuncture treatments delivered and reduction in the severity of depression (p = 0.015) was found. LIMITATIONS: The majority of the included trials were at a high risk of bias for performance blinding. The applicability of findings in Chinese populations to other populations is unclear, due to the use of a higher treatment frequency and number of treatments in China. The majority of trials did not report any post-trial follow-up and safety reporting was poor. CONCLUSIONS: Acupuncture may be a suitable adjunct to usual care and standard anti-depressant medication.

8.
Acupunct Med ; 37(4): 223-227, 2019 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31188014

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: There has been a burgeoning of research evaluating acupuncture for various symptoms of cancer and the side-effects associated with its treatment. A systematic review was conducted to examine the quality of reporting in published studies of acupuncture in cancer according to the STRICTA (STandards for Reporting Interventions in Clinical Trials of Acupuncture) guidelines. METHODS: Systematic review of published research of acupuncture for symptoms of cancer and the side-effects associated with its treatment. Databases searched were: Medline, CINAHL, Cochrane (all databases), Scopus, and PubMed from their inception to December 2014. Clinical trials, pilot/feasibility studies, observational studies, and case studies were included. Only full journal papers published in English were included. The quality of reporting was evaluated using STRICTA guidelines. Each included paper was assessed by two independent reviewers, with disagreements adjudicated by a third reviewer. RESULTS: 88 papers were identified which met the inclusion criteria. The median number of STRICTA items reported in trials with a control or comparator arm (n=47) was 14 out of 17 (range 8 to 17, IQR 4). For studies without a control or comparator arm the median was 11 out of a possible 15 (range 5 to 15, IQR 3). Key weaknesses in reporting included details of other components of treatments, and details of the acupuncturist administering treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the widespread use of the STRICTA guidelines in acupuncture research, adherence remains poor for a few specific items. Further research is required to explore the reasons why authors fail to report those items, and to develop strategies to improve the adherence to the guidelines.


Subject(s)
Acupuncture Therapy , Clinical Trials as Topic/standards , Neoplasms/therapy , Acupuncture Therapy/adverse effects , Databases, Bibliographic/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Publishing/standards
10.
Clin J Pain ; 35(5): 428-434, 2019 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30908336

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To optimally select chronic pain patients for different treatments, as it is of interest to identify patient characteristics that might moderate treatment effect. Our aim was to evaluate the impact of possible moderators on the effect of acupuncture treatment using a large data set. METHODS: We used data from an individual patient data meta-analysis of high-quality randomized trials of acupuncture for chronic headache and migraine, osteoarthritis, and back, neck, and shoulder pain. Using meta-analytic trial-level and patient-level regression analyses, we explored the impact of 5 documented patient characteristics (patients' age at baseline, sex, pain duration, baseline pain severity and baseline psychological distress) on the effect of acupuncture. RESULTS: A total of 39 trials met the inclusion criteria: 25 use sham-acupuncture controls (n = 7097) and 25 non-acupuncture controls (n = 16,041). Of the 5 patient characteristics analyzed, only baseline pain severity was found to potentially moderate the treatment effect of acupuncture, with patients reporting more severe pain at baseline experiencing more benefit from acupuncture compared to either sham-control or non-acupuncture control. Baseline psychological distress showed small treatment moderating effects, and results for sex were inconsistent. There was no strong evidence that age or duration of pain influenced the response to acupuncture. DISCUSSION: Of 5 patient characteristics tested, we found only baseline severity of pain to potentially moderate the effect of acupuncture treatment. For clinical practice, the evidence from this analysis does not justify stratifying chronic pain patients into subgroups that should or should not receive acupuncture on the basis of these 5 characteristics. Future acupuncture trials should assess other potentially important effect moderators.


Subject(s)
Acupuncture Therapy/methods , Chronic Pain/therapy , Chronic Pain/complications , Chronic Pain/diagnosis , Humans , Pain Measurement , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Severity of Illness Index , Stress, Psychological/complications , Treatment Outcome
11.
BMJ Open ; 8(10): e020222, 2018 10 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30327397

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To identify potentially effective complementary approaches for musculoskeletal (MSK)-mental health (MH) comorbidity, by synthesising evidence on effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and safety from systematic reviews (SRs). DESIGN: Scoping review of SRs. METHODS: We searched literature databases, registries and reference lists, and contacted key authors and professional organisations to identify SRs of randomised controlled trials for complementary medicine for MSK or MH. Inclusion criteria were: published after 2004, studying adults, in English and scoring >50% on Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR); quality appraisal checklist). SRs were synthesised to identify research priorities, based on moderate/good quality evidence, sample size and indication of cost-effectiveness and safety. RESULTS: We included 84 MSK SRs and 27 MH SRs. Only one focused on MSK-MH comorbidity. Meditative approaches and yoga may improve MH outcomes in MSK populations. Yoga and tai chi had moderate/good evidence for MSK and MH conditions. SRs reported moderate/good quality evidence (any comparator) in a moderate/large population for: low back pain (LBP) (yoga, acupuncture, spinal manipulation/mobilisation, osteopathy), osteoarthritis (OA) (acupuncture, tai chi), neck pain (acupuncture, manipulation/manual therapy), myofascial trigger point pain (acupuncture), depression (mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR), meditation, tai chi, relaxation), anxiety (meditation/MBSR, moving meditation, yoga), sleep disorders (meditative/mind-body movement) and stress/distress (mindfulness). The majority of these complementary approaches had some evidence of safety-only three had evidence of harm. There was some evidence of cost-effectiveness for spinal manipulation/mobilisation and acupuncture for LBP, and manual therapy/manipulation for neck pain, but few SRs reviewed cost-effectiveness and many found no data. CONCLUSIONS: Only one SR studied MSK-MH comorbidity. Research priorities for complementary medicine for both MSK and MH (LBP, OA, depression, anxiety and sleep problems) are yoga, mindfulness and tai chi. Despite the large number of SRs and the prevalence of comorbidity, more high-quality, large randomised controlled trials in comorbid populations are needed.


Subject(s)
Complementary Therapies/methods , Complementary Therapies/standards , Mental Disorders/therapy , Musculoskeletal Diseases/therapy , Evidence-Based Practice , Humans , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Systematic Reviews as Topic
12.
BMC Complement Altern Med ; 18(1): 290, 2018 Oct 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30373580

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Comorbidity of musculoskeletal (MSK) and mental health (MH) problems is common but challenging to treat using conventional approaches. Integration of conventional with complementary approaches (CAM) might help address this challenge. Integration can aim to transform biomedicine into a new health paradigm or to selectively incorporate CAM in addition to conventional care. This study explored professionals' experiences and views of CAM for comorbid patients and the potential for integration into UK primary care. METHODS: We ran focus groups with GPs and CAM practitioners at three sites across England and focus groups and interviews with healthcare commissioners. Topics included experience of co-morbid MSK-MH and CAM/integration, evidence, knowledge and barriers to integration. Sampling was purposive. A framework analysis used frequency, specificity, intensity of data, and disconfirming evidence. RESULTS: We recruited 36 CAM practitioners (4 focus groups), 20 GPs (3 focus groups) and 8 commissioners (1 focus group, 5 interviews). GPs described challenges treating MSK-MH comorbidity and agreed CAM might have a role. Exercise- or self-care-based CAMs were most acceptable to GPs. CAM practitioners were generally pro-integration. A prominent theme was different understandings of health between CAM and general practitioners, which was likely to impede integration. Another concern was that integration might fundamentally change the care provided by both professional groups. For CAM practitioners, NHS structural barriers were a major issue. For GPs, their lack of CAM knowledge and the pressures on general practice were barriers to integration, and some felt integrating CAM was beyond their capabilities. Facilitators of integration were evidence of effectiveness and cost effectiveness (particularly for CAM practitioners). Governance was the least important barrier for all groups. There was little consensus on the ideal integration model, particularly in terms of financing. Commissioners suggested CAM could be part of social prescribing. CONCLUSIONS: CAM has the potential to help the NHS in treating the burden of MSK-MH comorbidity. Given the challenges of integration, selective incorporation using traditional referral from primary care to CAM may be the most feasible model. However, cost implications would need to be addressed, possibly through models such as social prescribing or an extension of integrated personal commissioning.


Subject(s)
General Practitioners/psychology , Mental Disorders/therapy , Musculoskeletal Diseases/therapy , Primary Health Care , Adult , Attitude of Health Personnel , Complementary Therapies/statistics & numerical data , England , Female , Humans , Male , Mental Disorders/psychology , Mental Health , Middle Aged , Musculoskeletal Diseases/psychology , Qualitative Research , Workforce
13.
Acupunct Med ; 36(6): 349-357, 2018 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30201785

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Clear and unambiguous reporting is essential for researchers and clinicians to be able to assess the quality of research. To enhance the quality of reporting, consensus-based reporting guidelines are commonly used. OBJECTIVES: To update and extend previous research by evaluating the more recent impact of STRICTA (STandards for Reporting Interventions in Controlled Trials of Acupuncture) and CONSORT (CONsolidated Standards Of Reporting Trials) guidelines on the quality of reporting of acupuncture trials. METHODS: By random sampling, approximately 45 trials from each of five 2-year time periods between 1994 and 2015 were included in the study. Using scoring sheets based on the STRICTA and CONSORT checklist items (range 0 to 7 and 0 to 5, respectively), the distribution of items reported over time was investigated, with changes shown using scatterplots. The primary analysis used a before-and-after t-test to compare time periods. A meta-analysis investigated whether or not trials published in journals that endorsed STRICTA were associated with better reporting. RESULTS: The study included 207 trials. Improved reporting of items over time was observed, as represented by changes in the scatterplot slope and intercept. The mean STRICTA score increased from 4.27 in the 1994-1995 period to 5.53 in 2014-2015, an 18% improvement. The mean CONSORT score rose from 1.01 in the 1994-1995 period to 3.32 in 2014-2015, an increment of 46%. There was proportionately lower reporting for items related to practitioner background (STRICTA) and for randomisation implementation and allocation concealment (CONSORT). Trials published in journals that endorsed STRICTA had statistically significantly superior reporting of both STRICTA and CONSORT items overall. CONCLUSION: This study has provided evidence of an improvement in reporting of STRICTA and CONSORT items over the time period from 1994 to 2015. Journals that endorse STRICTA have a better record in terms of reporting quality. Some evidence suggests that the publication of STRICTA has had a positive impact on reporting quality.


Subject(s)
Acupuncture , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Humans , Publishing/standards
14.
Complement Ther Clin Pract ; 31: 308-314, 2018 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29705473

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: A large randomised controlled trial found that the provision of either Alexander Technique lessons or acupuncture, for those with chronic neck pain, resulted in significantly increased self-efficacy when compared with usual care alone. In turn, enhanced self-efficacy was associated with significant reductions in neck pain at 6 and 12 months. In this analysis we explore the perspectives of participants within the trial, with the aim of gaining a better understanding of how these interventions had an impact. METHODS: We used a longitudinal qualitative approach; in-depth interviews, informed by a topic guide, were conducted with a sample of the trial population. Participants were interviewed twice: at around six months (n = 30) and twelve months (n = 26) after trial entry. Analysis was guided by the principles of grounded theory, and key themes were developed. RESULTS: Five key themes emerged: pre-trial experiences of biomedical treatment against which subsequent interventions were compared; emergence of tangible benefits from the interventions; factors that contributed to the observed benefits, notably growing self-care and self-efficacy; a developing sense of embodiment as an integral part of the transformative process; and contribution of these factors to sustaining benefits over the longer term. CONCLUSIONS: In-depth interviews revealed a rich array of experiences. They gave insight into the positive impact of the interventions on development of self-care, self-efficacy and embodiment. These findings complement the quantitative trial data, providing a more nuanced understanding of the factors that underpin the previously quantified improvement in self-efficacy and its association with longer-term reductions in pain.


Subject(s)
Acupuncture Therapy/methods , Chronic Pain/therapy , Complementary Therapies/methods , Neck Pain/therapy , Female , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Qualitative Research , Self Care , Self Efficacy
15.
Eur J Integr Med ; 17: 64-71, 2018 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29527245

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: ATLAS was a pragmatic randomised (1:1:1 ratio), controlled trial recruiting patients with chronic neck pain (N = 517) and evaluating one-to-one Alexander Technique lessons, or acupuncture, each plus usual care, compared with usual care alone. The primary outcome (12-month Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire [NPQ]) demonstrated significant and clinically meaningful reductions in neck pain and associated disability for both interventions compared with usual care alone. Here we describe pre-specified, self-efficacy and other self-care-related outcomes for the Alexander group compared with usual care. METHODS: Participants reported on 11 self-efficacy/self-care-related outcome measures at 6 and 12 months. Linear or logistic regression models evaluated changes in parameters and impact on NPQ. Alexander teachers reported on lesson content. RESULTS: Lesson content reflected standard UK practice. The Alexander group (n = 172) reported significantly greater improvements, compared with usual care alone (n = 172), in most of the self-efficacy/self-care measures (9/11 measures at 6 months, and 8/11 at 12 months), including the ability to reduce pain in daily life. At 6 months, 81% (106/131) of Alexander participants reported significant improvement in the way they lived and cared for themselves (versus 23% for usual care), increasing to 87% (117/135) at 12 months (usual care: 25%). NPQ scores at both 6 and 12 months were related to improvement in self-efficacy and ability to reduce pain during daily life. CONCLUSIONS: Alexander Technique lessons led to long-term improvements in the way participants lived their daily lives and managed their neck pain. Alexander lessons promote self-efficacy and self-care, with consequent reductions in chronic neck pain.

16.
J Pain ; 19(5): 455-474, 2018 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29198932

ABSTRACT

Despite wide use in clinical practice, acupuncture remains a controversial treatment for chronic pain. Our objective was to update an individual patient data meta-analysis to determine the effect size of acupuncture for 4 chronic pain conditions. We searched MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials randomized trials published up until December 31, 2015. We included randomized trials of acupuncture needling versus either sham acupuncture or no acupuncture control for nonspecific musculoskeletal pain, osteoarthritis, chronic headache, or shoulder pain. Trials were only included if allocation concealment was unambiguously determined to be adequate. Raw data were obtained from study authors and entered into an individual patient data meta-analysis. The main outcome measures were pain and function. An additional 13 trials were identified, with data received for a total of 20,827 patients from 39 trials. Acupuncture was superior to sham as well as no acupuncture control for each pain condition (all P < .001) with differences between groups close to .5 SDs compared with no acupuncture control and close to .2 SDs compared with sham. We also found clear evidence that the effects of acupuncture persist over time with only a small decrease, approximately 15%, in treatment effect at 1 year. In secondary analyses, we found no obvious association between trial outcome and characteristics of acupuncture treatment, but effect sizes of acupuncture were associated with the type of control group, with smaller effects sizes for sham controlled trials that used a penetrating needle for sham, and for trials that had high intensity of intervention in the control arm. We conclude that acupuncture is effective for the treatment of chronic pain, with treatment effects persisting over time. Although factors in addition to the specific effects of needling at correct acupuncture point locations are important contributors to the treatment effect, decreases in pain after acupuncture cannot be explained solely in terms of placebo effects. Variations in the effect size of acupuncture in different trials are driven predominantly by differences in treatments received by the control group rather than by differences in the characteristics of acupuncture treatment. PERSPECTIVE: Acupuncture is effective for the treatment of chronic musculoskeletal, headache, and osteoarthritis pain. Treatment effects of acupuncture persist over time and cannot be explained solely in terms of placebo effects. Referral for a course of acupuncture treatment is a reasonable option for a patient with chronic pain.


Subject(s)
Acupuncture Therapy/methods , Acupuncture Therapy/psychology , Chronic Pain/psychology , Chronic Pain/therapy , Acupuncture Therapy/trends , Chronic Pain/diagnosis , Humans , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic/methods , Treatment Outcome
17.
BJGP Open ; 2(4): bjgpopen18X101614, 2018 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30723800

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In 2005,12% of the English population visited a complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) practitioner. AIM: To obtain up-to-date general population figures for practitioner-led CAM use in England, and to discover people's views and experiences regarding access. DESIGN & SETTING: A face-to-face questionnaire survey was commissioned. A nationally representative adult quota sample (aged ≥15 years) was used. METHOD: Ten questions were included within Ipsos MORI's weekly population-based survey. The questions explored 12-month practitioner-led CAM use, reasons for non-use, views on NHS-provided CAM, and willingness to pay. RESULTS: Of 4862 adults surveyed, 766 (16%) had seen a CAM practitioner. People most commonly visited CAM practitioners for manual therapies (massage, osteopathy, chiropractic) and acupuncture, as well as yoga, pilates, reflexology, and mindfulness or meditation. Women, people with higher socioeconomic status (SES) and those in south England were more likely to access CAM. Musculoskeletal conditions (mainly back pain) accounted for 68% of use, and mental health 12%. Most was through self-referral (70%) and self-financing. GPs (17%) or NHS professionals (4%) referred and/or recommended CAM to users. These CAM users were more often unemployed, with lower income and social grade, and receiving NHS-funded CAM. Responders were willing to pay varying amounts for CAM; 22% would not pay anything. Almost two in five responders felt NHS funding and GP referral and/or endorsement would increase their CAM use. CONCLUSION: CAM use in England is common for musculoskeletal and mental health problems, but varies by sex, geography, and SES. It is mainly self-referred and self-financed; some is GP-endorsed and/or referred, especially for individuals of lower SES. Researchers, patients, and commissioners should collaborate to research the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of CAM and consider its availability on the NHS.

18.
PLoS One ; 12(12): e0178918, 2017.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29211741

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To assess the cost-effectiveness of acupuncture and usual care, and Alexander Technique lessons and usual care, compared with usual GP care alone for chronic neck pain patients. METHODS: An economic evaluation was undertaken alongside the ATLAS trial, taking both NHS and wider societal viewpoints. Participants were offered up to twelve acupuncture sessions or twenty Alexander lessons (equivalent overall contact time). Costs were in pounds sterling. Effectiveness was measured using the generic EQ-5D to calculate quality adjusted life years (QALYs), as well as using a specific neck pain measure-the Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire (NPQ). RESULTS: In the base case analysis, incremental QALY gains were 0.032 and 0.025 in the acupuncture and Alexander groups, respectively, in comparison to usual GP care, indicating moderate health benefits for both interventions. Incremental costs were £451 for acupuncture and £667 for Alexander, mainly driven by intervention costs. Acupuncture was likely to be cost-effective (ICER = £18,767/QALY bootstrapped 95% CI £4,426 to £74,562) and was robust to most sensitivity analyses. Alexander lessons were not cost-effective at the lower NICE threshold of £20,000/QALY (£25,101/QALY bootstrapped 95% CI -£150,208 to £248,697) but may be at £30,000/QALY, however, there was considerable statistical uncertainty in all tested scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: In comparison with usual care, acupuncture is likely to be cost-effective for chronic neck pain, whereas, largely due to higher intervention costs, Alexander lessons are unlikely to be cost-effective. However, there were high levels of missing data and further research is needed to assess the long-term cost-effectiveness of these interventions.


Subject(s)
Acupuncture/methods , Chronic Pain/therapy , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Movement , Musculoskeletal Manipulations/methods , Neck Pain/therapy , Acupuncture/economics , Age Factors , Female , Humans , Male , Musculoskeletal Manipulations/economics , Primary Health Care
19.
Pain ; 158(12): 2499-2500, 2017 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29120952
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...