Are Sham Acupuncture Interventions More Effective than (Other) Placebos? A Re-Analysis of Data from the Cochrane Review on Placebo Effects (original) (raw)
Article navigation
Meta-Analysis| September 07 2010
a Institute of General Practice, Technische Universität München, b Institute of Medical Psychology, Ludwig-Maximilians University, Munich, Germany
Search for other works by this author on:
a Institute of General Practice, Technische Universität München, b Institute of Medical Psychology, Ludwig-Maximilians University, Munich, Germany
Search for other works by this author on:
a Institute of General Practice, Technische Universität München, b Institute of Medical Psychology, Ludwig-Maximilians University, Munich, Germany
Search for other works by this author on:
Forschende Komplementärmedizin / Research in Complementary Medicine (2010) 17 (5): 259–264.
Abstract
Background and Objective: A recent Cochrane review on placebo interventions for all kinds of conditions found that ‘physical placebos’ (which included sham acupuncture) were associated with larger effects over no-treatment control groups than ‘pharmacological placebos’. We re-analyzed the data from this review to investigate whether effects associated with sham acupuncture differed from those of other ‘physical placebos’. Methods: All trials included in the Cochrane review as investigating ‘physical placebos’ were classified as investigating either (sham) acupuncture or other physical placebos. The latter group was further subclassified into groups of similar interventions. Data from the Cochrane review were re-entered into the RevMan 5 software for meta-analysis. The primary analysis was a random-effects analysis of trials reporting continuous outcomes of trials that used either sham acupuncture or other physical placebos. Results: Out of a total of 61 trials which reported a continuous outcome measure, 19 compared sham acupuncture and 42 compared other physical placebos with a notreatment control group. The trials re-analyzed were highly heterogeneous regarding patients, interventions and outcomes measured. The pooled standardized mean difference was –0.41 (95% confidence interval –0.56, –0.24) between sham acupuncture and no treatment and –0.26 (95% CI –0.37, –0.15) between other physical placebos and no treatment (p value for subgroup differences = 0.007). Significant differences were also observed between subgroups of other physical placebos. Conclusion: Due to the heterogeneity of the trials included and the indirect comparison our results must be interpreted with caution. Still, they suggest that sham acupuncture interventions might, on average, be associated with larger effects than pharmacological and other physical placebos.
This content is only available via PDF.
© 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
2010
255 Views
104 Web of Science
81 Crossref