A multicenter, randomized, controlled trial testing the effects of acupuncture on allergic rhinitis

Clinical practice guideline: Allergic rhinitis

OBJECTIVE

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is one of the most common diseases affecting adults. It is the most common chronic disease in children in the United States today and the fifth most common chronic disease in the United States overall. AR is estimated to affect nearly 1 in every 6 Americans and generates $2 to $5 billion in direct health expenditures annually. It can impair quality of life and, through loss of work and school attendance, is responsible for as much as $2 to $4 billion in lost productivity annually. Not surprisingly, myriad diagnostic tests and treatments are used in managing this disorder, yet there is considerable variation in their use. This clinical practice guideline was undertaken to optimize the care of patients with AR by addressing quality improvement opportunities through an evaluation of the available evidence and an assessment of the harm-benefit balance of various diagnostic and management options.

PURPOSE

The primary purpose of this guideline is to address quality improvement opportunities for all clinicians, in any setting, who are likely to manage patients with AR as well as to optimize patient care, promote effective diagnosis and therapy, and reduce harmful or unnecessary variations in care. The guideline is intended to be applicable for both pediatric and adult patients with AR. Children under the age of 2 years were excluded from the clinical practice guideline because rhinitis in this population may be different than in older patients and is not informed by the same evidence base. The guideline is intended to focus on a limited number of quality improvement opportunities deemed most important by the working group and is not intended to be a comprehensive reference for diagnosing and managing AR. The recommendations outlined in the guideline are not intended to represent the standard of care for patient management, nor are the recommendations intended to limit treatment or care provided to individual patients.

ACTION STATEMENTS

The development group made a strong recommendation that clinicians recommend intranasal steroids for patients with a clinical diagnosis of AR whose symptoms affect their quality of life. The development group also made a strong recommendation that clinicians recommend oral second-generation/less sedating antihistamines for patients with AR and primary complaints of sneezing and itching. The panel made the following recommendations: (1) Clinicians should make the clinical diagnosis of AR when patients present with a history and physical examination consistent with an allergic cause and 1 or more of the following symptoms: nasal congestion, runny nose, itchy nose, or sneezing. Findings of AR consistent with an allergic cause include, but are not limited to, clear rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, pale discoloration of the nasal mucosa, and red and watery eyes. (2) Clinicians should perform and interpret, or refer to a clinician who can perform and interpret, specific IgE (skin or blood) allergy testing for patients with a clinical diagnosis of AR who do not respond to empiric treatment, or when the diagnosis is uncertain, or when knowledge of the specific causative allergen is needed to target therapy. (3) Clinicians should assess patients with a clinical diagnosis of AR for, and document in the medical record, the presence of associated conditions such as asthma, atopic dermatitis, sleep-disordered breathing, conjunctivitis, rhinosinusitis, and otitis media. (4) Clinicians should offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, immunotherapy (sublingual or subcutaneous) for patients with AR who have inadequate response to symptoms with pharmacologic therapy with or without environmental controls. The panel recommended against (1) clinicians routinely performing sinonasal imaging in patients presenting with symptoms consistent with a diagnosis of AR and (2) clinicians offering oral leukotriene receptor antagonists as primary therapy for patients with AR. The panel group made the following options: (1) Clinicians may advise avoidance of known allergens or may advise environmental controls (ie, removal of pets; the use of air filtration systems, bed covers, and acaricides [chemical agents formulated to kill dust mites]) in patients with AR who have identified allergens that correlate with clinical symptoms. (2) Clinicians may offer intranasal antihistamines for patients with seasonal, perennial, or episodic AR. (3) Clinicians may offer combination pharmacologic therapy in patients with AR who have inadequate response to pharmacologic monotherapy. (4) Clinicians may offer, or refer to a surgeon who can offer, inferior turbinate reduction in patients with AR with nasal airway obstruction and enlarged inferior turbinates who have failed medical management. (5) Clinicians may offer acupuncture, or refer to a clinician who can offer acupuncture, for patients with AR who are interested in nonpharmacologic therapy. The development group provided no recommendation regarding the use of herbal therapy for patients with AR.

Acupuncture for the Treatment of Allergic Rhinitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Because acupuncture may modulate the immune system, it has been proposed as a useful treatment for patients with allergic rhinitis (AR). Here, we assessed the evidence for the clinical efficacy of acupuncture for the management of AR patients by performing a systematic review and meta-analysis of the published literatures.

Methods

By searching PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane clinical trials database, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure from 1980 through July 11, 2013, we collected and analyzed the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of acupuncture for the treatment of AR patients to assess its efficacy and safety.

Results

Thirteen full papers that met our inclusion criteria were included, and a total of 2365 participants, including 1126 as treatment group and 1239 as control group, were enrolled. Compared with control group, acupuncture treatment group exerted a significant reduction in nasal symptom scores (weighted mean difference [WMD]: -4.42, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -8.42 to -0.43, p = 0.03), medication scores (WMD: 1.39, 95% CI: -2.18 to -0.61, p = 0005), and serum IgE (WMD: -75.00, 95% CI: -91.17 to -58.83, p < 0.00001). Data relating to Rhinitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ) and 36-Item Short-Form (SF-36) component score in included studies were analyzed, which ultimately point to the efficacy of acupuncture treatment in improving quality of life in AR patients. No fatal events were reported in any of the included studies, and no serious systemic reaction, which needed treatment in the hospital, was related to the acupuncture treatment.

Conclusion

Our meta-analysis suggests that that acupuncture could be a safe and valid treatment option for AR patients.

Complementary and alternative therapy (CAM) in the treatment of allergic rhinitis

CAM is any therapeutic intervention that exists outside traditional allopathic medicine. The utilization in the US population is increasing up to 4 out of 10 patients in some surveys. Given this increasing prevalence, it is essential that clinicians have the resources to advise their patients in the utilizations, benefits, and potential harms of these alternative therapies. Recent literature was reviewed in regard to traditional Chinese medicine [TCM], acupuncture, homeopathy, and herbal therapy in the treatment of allergic rhinitis limited to randomized controlled trials. Several complementary treatment studies demonstrated statistically significant benefits to patients' quality of life and symptom scoring without providing duration of effect. Alternative therapy studies have revealed mixed results in regard to efficacy. Although the adverse effect profile is low, additional studies will be required to further promote integration into the standard of care for the routine treatment of allergic rhinitis.

Effectiveness of De Qi during acupuncture for the treatment of tinnitus: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Acupuncture has been used in China to treat tinnitus for a long time. There is debate as to whether or not De Qi is a key factor in achieving the efficacy of acupuncture. However, there is no sufficient evidence obtained from randomized controlled trials to confirm the role of De Qi in the treatment of acupuncture for tinnitus. This study aims to identify the effect of De Qi for patients who receive acupuncture to alleviate tinnitus by a prospective, double-blind, randomized, sham-controlled trial.

METHODS AND DESIGN

This study compares two acupuncture groups (with or without manipulation) in 292 patients with a history of subjective tinnitus. The trial will be conducted in the Teaching Hospital of Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine. In the study, the patients will be randomly assigned into two groups according to a computer-generated randomization list and assessed prior to treatment. Then, they will receive 5 daily sessions of 30 minutes each time for 4 consecutive weeks and undergo a 12-week follow-up phase. The administration of acupuncture follows the guidelines for clinical research on acupuncture (WHO Regional Publication, Western Pacific Series Number 15, 1995), and is performed double-blind by physicians well-trained in acupuncture. The measures of outcome include the subjective symptoms scores and quantitative sensations of De Qi evaluated by Visual Analog Scales (VAS) and the Chinese version of the 'modified' Massachusetts General Hospital Acupuncture Sensation Scale (C-MMASS). Furthermore, adverse events are recorded and analyzed. If any subjects are withdrawn from the trial, intention-to-treat analysis (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) analysis will be performed.

DISCUSSION

The key features of this trial include the randomization procedures, large sample and the standardized protocol to evaluate De Qi qualitatively and quantitatively in the treatment of acupuncture for tinnitus. The trial will be the first study with a high evidence level in China to assess the efficacy of De Qi in the treatment of tinnitus in a randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled manner.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR-TRC-14004720 (6 May 2014).

Effectiveness of strengthened stimulation during acupuncture for the treatment of allergic rhinitis: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The traditional Chinese theory of acupuncture emphasizes that the intensity of acupuncture must reach a threshold to generate de qi (a specific and compound sensation during the acupuncture), which is necessary to achieve the best therapeutic effect. However, the notion that de qi must be achieved for maximum benefit has not been confirmed by modern scientific evidence. This study aims to compare the efficacy of acupuncture with either strong (intended to elicit de qi) or weak stimulation among patients with allergic rhinitis.

METHODS/DESIGN

This study compares real versus sham acupuncture in 140 patients with a history of persistent allergic rhinitis (PER) or intermittent allergic rhinitis (IAR) and with a positive skin prick test (SPT). The trial will be conducted in the Teaching Hospital of Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine (China). In the study, patients will be randomly assigned into two groups by computer-generated randomization and assessed prior to treatment. They will then receive 12 sessions of treatments for 4 consecutive weeks and have a follow-up phase lasting 12 weeks. The main outcome measures include the primary and secondary indicators. Primary indicators are subjective symptoms scores as evaluated by visual analogue scales (VAS), rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaires (RQLQ), and the Modified Massachusetts General Hospital acupuncture sensation scale, Chinese version (C-MMASS). The secondary indicators are the results of laboratory examinations, such as serum allergen-specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE) nasal inflammatory cells counts (mast cells, eosinophils, and T cells), and nitric oxide concentration in nasal excretion. The use of anti-allergic medication will also be recorded as one of the secondary indicators. Furthermore, adverse events will be recorded and analyzed. Intention-to-treat analysis (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) analysis will be performed to test and verify the results in this trial.

DISCUSSION

The results of this trial will demonstrate the efficacy of using acupuncture to treat allergic rhinitis and verify whether the effectiveness of acupuncture is related to the needle sensation de qi.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR-TRC-13003594 (registered on 16 August 2013, and the first patient was randomized on 27 September 2013).

The effectiveness of acupuncture compared to loratadine in patients allergic to house dust mites

Background. The aim of this work was to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of acupuncture and its impact on the immune system in comparison to loratadine in the treatment of persistent allergic rhinitis caused by house dust mites. Methods. In this study, 24 patients suffering from persistent allergic rhinitis induced by house dust mites were treated either with acupuncture (n = 15) or with loratadine (n = 9). The evaluation of the data was based on the subjective and the objective rhinoconjunctivitis symptom scores, specific and total IgE, and interleukins (IL-4, IL-10, and IFN- γ ) as markers for the activity of Th1 or Th2 cells. Results. The treatments with acupuncture as well as with loratadine were considered effective in the patients' subjective assessment, whereby the effect of the acupuncture tended to be assessed as more persistent after the end of treatment. A change in the specific or the total IgE was not detectable in either group. The interleukin profile showed the tendency of an increasing IL-10 value in the acupuncture group. The results of the study show that the effectiveness of acupuncture is comparable to that of loratadine. Conclusion. Acupuncture is a clinically effective form of therapy in the treatment of patients suffering from persistent allergic rhinitis. The results indicate the probability of an immunomodulatory effect.

Acupuncture for allergic disease therapy--the current state of evidence

This review summarizes current evidence for acupuncture treatment of allergies. Several randomized controlled trials have demonstrated a specific effect of acupuncture for allergic rhinitis; while a few studies have shown positive effects for atopic dermatitis, asthma and itch. Specifically for allergic rhinitis and asthma, acupuncture may be cost-effective in terms of money spent per quality-of-life gained. Acupuncture plays an increasingly important role as an evidence-based therapy for allergy relief and can be recommended as adjunct therapy for allergic rhinitis. Future randomized controlled trials need to further explore acupuncture efficacy for the treatment of itch, atopic dermatitis and asthma. More experimental research is also needed to investigate mechanisms of action underlying acupuncture for allergy relief.

New therapies for allergic rhinitis

Because of its burden on patient's lives and its impact on asthma, allergic rhinitis must be treated properly with more effective and safer treatments. According to guidelines by Allergic Rhinitis and Its Impact on Asthma (ARIA), the classification, pathogenesis, and treatment of allergic rhinitis are well defined. Currently, second-generation antihistamines and inhaled steroids are considered the cornerstone of first-line therapy. However, new formulations of available drugs (e.g., loratadine and rupatadine oral solution, ebastine fast-dissolving tablets, and the combination of intranasal fluticasone propionate and azelastine hydrochloride), recently discovered molecules (e.g., ciclesonide, bilastine, and phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitors), immunologic targets (e.g., omalizumab), and unconventional treatments (e.g., homeopathic treatments) are currently under investigation and represent a new frontier in modern medicine and in allergic rhinitis management. The aim of this review is to provide an update on allergic rhinitis treatment, paying particular attention to clinical trials published within the past 20 months that assessed the efficacy and safety of new formulations of available drugs or new molecules.

Clinically meaningful nocebo effect occurs in acupuncture treatment: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the nocebo effect using randomized acupuncture trials that include sham and no-treatment groups.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Electronic databases were searched to retrieve eligible trials from their inception until June 2013. Risk differences were then calculated using the acupuncture and sham groups to determine the treatment effect and the sham and no-treatment groups to determine the nocebo effect.

RESULTS

In total, 58 eligible trials were analyzed. On the basis of the rate of patients with any adverse event in 31 trials reporting available data, the treatment effect was 0.012 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.003, 0.021), with a number needed to harm (NNH) of 83 (95% CI: 48, 333). The nocebo effect was 0.049 (95% CI: 0.012, 0.086), with an NNH of 20 (95% CI: 12, 83). By contrast, the rate of dropouts due to adverse events in 39 trials reporting available data showed no differences for both effects. In addition, nearly 70% of the trials reported zero dropouts in the sham and no-treatment groups.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that (1) the nocebo effect of acupuncture is clinically meaningful and (2) the rate of patients with any adverse event may be a more appropriate indicator of the nocebo effect.

A randomised multicentre trial of acupuncture in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis--trial intervention including physician and treatment characteristics

Background

In a large randomised trial in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR), acupuncture was superior compared to sham acupuncture and rescue medication. The aim of this paper is to describe the characteristics of the trial’s participating physicians and to describe the trial intervention in accordance with the STRICTA (Standards for Reporting Interventions in Controlled Trials of Acupuncture) guidelines, to make details of the trial intervention more transparent to researchers and physicians.

Methods

ACUSAR (ACUpuncture in Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis) was a three-armed, randomised, controlled multicentre trial. 422 SAR patients were randomised to semi-standardised acupuncture plus rescue medication (RM, cetirizine), sham acupuncture plus RM or RM alone. We sent a questionnaire to trial physicians in order to evaluate their characteristics regarding their education about and experience in providing acupuncture. During the trial, acupuncturists were asked to diagnose all of their patients according to Chinese Medicine (CM) as a basis for the semi-standardised, individualized intervention in the acupuncture group. Every acupuncture point used in this trial had to be documented after each session

Results

Acupuncture was administered in outpatient clinics by 46 (mean age 47 ± 10 years; 24 female/ 22 male) conventionally-trained medical doctors (67% with postgraduate specialization such as internal or family medicine) with additional extensive acupuncture training (median 500 hours (1st quartile 350, 3rd quartile 1000 hours with 73% presenting a B-diploma in acupuncture training (350 hours)) and experience (mean 14 years in practice). The most reported traditional CM diagnosis was ‘wind-cold invading the lung’ (37%) and ‘wind-heat invading the lung’ (37%), followed by ‘lung and spleen qi deficiency’ (9%). The total number of needles used was higher in the acupuncture group compared to the sham acupuncture group (15.7 ± 2.5 vs. 10.0 ± 1.6).

Conclusions

The trial interventions were provided by well educated and experienced acupuncturists. The different number of needles in both intervention groups could be possibly a reason for the better clinical effect in SAR patients. For future trials it might be more appropriate to ensure that acupuncture and sham acupuncture groups should each be treated by a similar number of needles.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00610584.