Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.

Detailed Search Results

Pharmacopuncture therapy for adhesive capsulitis: a pragmatic randomized controlled pilot study
Kim D, Park KS, Kim SA, Seo JY, Cho HW, Lee YJ, Yang C, Ha IH, Han CH
Integrative Medicine Research 2024 Sep;13(3):101065
clinical trial
8/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: Yes; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: Yes; Adequate follow-up: Yes; Intention-to-treat analysis: Yes; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed*

BACKGROUND: Although several studies have reported the effectiveness of acupuncture treatment for adhesive capsulitis (AC), research on pharmacopuncture therapy for AC remains limited. We compared the effectiveness and safety of pharmacopuncture and physiotherapy for AC. METHODS: This pragmatic, randomized, controlled, parallel-group pilot study enrolled patients with limitations of shoulder movement and a numeric rating scale (NRS) score for shoulder pain >= 5 randomized (1 to 1) to the pharmacopuncture therapy (PPT) and physiotherapy (PT) groups. Treatment sessions were administered twice weekly for 6 weeks, and the participants were followed up for 13 weeks after randomization. The primary outcome was the NRS score for shoulder pain, and the secondary outcomes were the visual analog scale (VAS), Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI), range of motion (ROM), patient global impression of change (PGIC), EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level (EQ-5D-5L), and Short Form 12 Health Survey (SF-12) scores. The intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis was set as the primary analysis. RESULTS: Among 50 participants, for the primary endpoint (week 7) the PPT group showed a significantly superior improvement in NRS, VAS, SPADI, ROM for flexion, ROM for abduction, and EQ-5D-5L scores. The ROM for extension, ROM for adduction, physical component summary, and patient global impression of change were significantly better in the PPT than in the PT group, and these effects were sustained until week 13. CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot study, PPT showed better effects than PT, confirming the feasibility of a follow-up main study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05292482) and cris.nih.go.kr (KCT0007198).

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help