Skip to main content

Table 2 Estimate effect of cupping therapy and acupuncture for pain-related conditions

From: Cupping therapy versus acupuncture for pain-related conditions: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials and trial sequential analysis

Study ID

Sample size

Disease

Estimate effect

P

Outcomes

Zhou [19]

200

Cervical spondylosis

MD −1.70, 95% CI −1.94 to −1.46

P < 0.00,001

VAS for pain

Mou [21]

124

Cervical spondylotic radiculopathy

MD 0.11, 95% CI −0.78 to 1.00

MD 4.33, 95% CI −3.14 to 11.80

MD 1.59, 95% CI −1.17 to 4.35

P = 0.81

P = 0.26

P = 0.26

VAS

Neck disability index (physical therapy)

CAS

Wang [25]

80

Knee osteoarthritis

RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.32 to 5.19

RD 0.03, 95% CI −0.11 to 0.16

P = 0.72

P = 0.72

Symptom improvement rate

Wang [26]

171

Knee osteoarthritis

MD −0.97, 95% CI −1.56 to −0.38

MD −1.35, 95% CI −1.91 to −0.79

MD −1.01, 95% CI −1.87 to −0.15

MD −0.17, 95% CI −0.52 to 0.18

MD −2.92, 95% CI −6.18 to 0,34

MD −4.14, 95% CI −8.49 to 0.21

MD −1.66, 95% CI −2.48 to −0.84

MD −0.35, 95% CI −0.68 to −0.02

MD −4.93, 95% CI −7.97 to −1.89

MD −6.93, 95% CI −11.0 to −12.85

P = 0.001

P < 0.00001

P = 0.02

P = 0.34

P = 0.08

P = 0.06

P < 0.0001

P = 0.04

P = 0.001

P = 0.0009

VAS

VAS (follow at 4 weeks)

WOMAC—pain scores

WOMAC—stiff scores

WOMAC—difficult of life scores

WOMAC —total scores

WOMAC—pain scores (follow at 4 weeks)

WOMAC—stiff scores (follow at 4 weeks)

WOMAC—difficult of life scores (follow at 4 weeks)

WOMAC total scores (follow at 4 weeks)

Wang [29]

62

Lumber disk herniation

MD 1.88, 95% CI −0.24 to 4.00

RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.27

RD −0.07, 95% CI −0.31 to 0.16

P = 0.08

P = 0.53

P = 0.53

JOA scores

Symptom improvement rate

Zhou [30]

120

The third lumber vertebral transverse process syndrome

RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.15

RD 0.05, 95% CI −0.03 to 0.13

MD −1.58,95% CI −2.04 to −1.12

P = 0.25

P = 0.24

P < 0.00001

Symptom improvement rate

VAS scores

Zhang [31]

40

Postherpetic neuralgia

RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.09

RD −0.05, 95% CI −0.18 to 0.08

MD 0.10, 95% CI −0.51 to 0.70

P = 0.47

P = 0.44

P = 0.75

Symptom improvement rate

VAS

Huang [32]

96

Postherpetic neuralgia

RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.33

RD 0.13, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.25

MD −1.17, 95% CI −1.67 to −0.67

P = 0.05

P = 0.04

P < 0.00001

Symptom improvement rate

VAS

Wu [33]

407

Toothache

RR 1.04, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.08

RD 0.03, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.07

P = 0.03

P = 0.03

Symptom improvement rate

Liu [36]

76

Muscles fibrositis

RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.15

RD 0.05, 95% CI −0.03 to 0.14

P = 0.24

P = 0.22

Symptom improvement rate

Huang [37]

264

Soft tissue contusion

RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.05

RD −0.01, 95% CI −0.06 to 0.05

P = 0.79

P = 0.79

Symptom improvement rate

Zhou [38]

46

Acute lumbar sprain

RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.33

RD 0.08, 95% CI −0.10 to 0.25

P = 0.39

P = 0.38

Symptom improvement rate

Wang [39]

120

Acute ankle joint

RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.33

RD 0.15, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.25

P = 0.009

P = 0.005

Symptom improvement rate

Cao [40]

56

Fibromyalgia

MD −4.06, 95% CI −5.4 to 13.72

MD −5.93, 95% CI −7.89 to 19.75

MD −0.42, 95% CI −4.09 to 4.93

 

VAS

Quality of life

HAMD

  1. VAS Visual Analogue Scale, MD mean difference, CAS the Clinical Assessment Scale, WOMAC the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index, JOA the Joint Operational Area, SF-36 the MOS item short from health survey, HAMD the Hamilton Depression Scale