Efficacy observation of depression in nicotine withdrawal treated with acupuncture

Efficacy and safety of acupuncture for depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Acupuncture is widely accepted as a therapeutic option for managing depression. However, evidence from clinical trials remains controversial. This review aims to synthesize the best available evidence on the efficacy and safety of acupuncture in managing depression. The review was performed according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines. Five databases and the relevant trial registries were searched from the inception to October 2021. Randomized clinical trials of acupuncture for managing depression, published in English, were selected for inclusion. The quality of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Netmeta and dmetar of R packages were used to conduct a network meta-analysis. Twenty-two trials with 2391 participants were eligible and included in the analysis. This review found evidence that electroacupuncture (EA) plus antidepressant achieved superior outcomes compared with the waitlist (standardized mean difference = -8.86, 95% confidence interval: -14.78 to -2.93). The treatment ranking of different interventions in improving depression symptoms indicated that EA plus antidepressant with a probability of 0.8294, followed by manual acupuncture (MA) plus antidepressant (0.6470) and MA (0.5232). Acupuncture, either in isolation or as an adjunct to pharmacological treatment, has clinical benefits and can be considered a safe option for managing depression.

Acupuncture for depression

BACKGROUND

Depression is recognised as a major public health problem that has a substantial impact on individuals and on society. People with depression may consider using complementary therapies such as acupuncture, and an increasing body of research has been undertaken to assess the effectiveness of acupuncture for treatment of individuals with depression. This is the second update of this review.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effectiveness and adverse effects of acupuncture for treatment of individuals with depression.To determine:• Whether acupuncture is more effective than treatment as usual/no treatment/wait list control for treating and improving quality of life for individuals with depression.• Whether acupuncture is more effective than control acupuncture for treating and improving quality of life for individuals with depression.• Whether acupuncture is more effective than pharmacological therapies for treating and improving quality of life for individuals with depression.• Whether acupuncture plus pharmacological therapy is more effective than pharmacological therapy alone for treating and improving quality of life for individuals with depression.• Whether acupuncture is more effective than psychological therapies for treating and improving quality of life for individuals with depression.• Adverse effects of acupuncture compared with treatment as usual/no treatment/wait list control, control acupuncture, pharmacological therapies, and psychological therapies for treatment of individuals with depression.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases to June 2016: Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Group Controlled Trials Register (CCMD-CTR), Korean Studies Information Service System (KISS), DBPIA (Korean article database website), Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information, Research Information Service System (RISS), Korea Med, Korean Medical Database (KM base), and Oriental Medicine Advanced Searching Integrated System (OASIS), as well as several Korean medical journals.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Review criteria called for inclusion of all published and unpublished randomised controlled trials comparing acupuncture versus control acupuncture, no treatment, medication, other structured psychotherapies (cognitive-behavioural therapy, psychotherapy, or counselling), or standard care. Modes of treatment included acupuncture, electro-acupuncture, and laser acupuncture. Participants included adult men and women with depression diagnosed by Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Fourth Edition (DSM-IV), Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDC), International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD), or Chinese Classification of Mental Disorders Third Edition Revised (CCMD-3-R). If necessary, we used trial authors' definitions of depressive disorder.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We performed meta-analyses using risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes and standardised mean differences (SMDs) for continuous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Primary outcomes were reduction in the severity of depression, measured by self-rating scales or by clinician-rated scales, and improvement in depression, defined as remission versus no remission. We assessed evidence quality using the GRADE method.

MAIN RESULTS

This review is an update of previous versions and includes 64 studies (7104 participants). Most studies were at high risk of performance bias, at high or unclear risk of detection bias, and at low or unclear risk of selection bias, attrition bias, reporting bias, and other bias.Acupuncture versus no treatment/wait list/treatment as usualWe found low-quality evidence suggesting that acupuncture (manual and electro-) may moderately reduce the severity of depression by end of treatment (SMD -0.66, 95% CI -1.06 to -0.25, five trials, 488 participants). It is unclear whether data show differences between groups in the risk of adverse events (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.24, one trial, 302 participants; low-quality evidence).Acupuncture versus control acupuncture (invasive, non-invasive sham controls)Acupuncture may be associated with a small reduction in the severity of depression of 1.69 points on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) by end of treatment (95% CI -3.33 to -0.05, 14 trials, 841 participants; low-quality evidence). It is unclear whether data show differences between groups in the risk of adverse events (RR 1.63, 95% CI 0.93 to 2.86, five trials, 300 participants; moderate-quality evidence).Acupuncture versus medicationWe found very low-quality evidence suggesting that acupuncture may confer small benefit in reducing the severity of depression by end of treatment (SMD -0.23, 95% CI -0.40 to -0.05, 31 trials, 3127 participants). Studies show substantial variation resulting from use of different classes of medications and different modes of acupuncture stimulation. Very low-quality evidence suggests lower ratings of adverse events following acupuncture compared with medication alone, as measured by the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) (mean difference (MD) -4.32, 95% CI -7.41 to -1.23, three trials, 481 participants).Acupuncture plus medication versus medication aloneWe found very low-quality evidence suggesting that acupuncture is highly beneficial in reducing the severity of depression by end of treatment (SMD -1.15, 95% CI -1.63 to -0.66, 11 trials, 775 participants). Studies show substantial variation resulting from use of different modes of acupuncture stimulation. It is unclear whether differences in adverse events are associated with different modes of acupuncture (SMD -1.32, 95% CI -2.86 to 0.23, three trials, 200 participants; very low-quality evidence).Acupuncture versus psychological therapyIt is unclear whether data show differences between acupuncture and psychological therapy in the severity of depression by end of treatment (SMD -0.5, 95% CI -1.33 to 0.33, two trials, 497 participants; low-quality evidence). Low-quality evidence suggests no differences between groups in rates of adverse events (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.33, one trial, 452 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The reduction in severity of depression was less when acupuncture was compared with control acupuncture than when acupuncture was compared with no treatment control, although in both cases, results were rated as providing low-quality evidence. The reduction in severity of depression with acupuncture given alone or in conjunction with medication versus medication alone is uncertain owing to the very low quality of evidence. The effect of acupuncture compared with psychological therapy is unclear. The risk of adverse events with acupuncture is also unclear, as most trials did not report adverse events adequately. Few studies included follow-up periods or assessed important outcomes such as quality of life. High-quality randomised controlled trials are urgently needed to examine the clinical efficacy and acceptability of acupuncture, as well as its effectiveness, compared with acupuncture controls, medication, or psychological therapies.

Acupuncture and related interventions for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Acupuncture and related techniques are promoted as a treatment for smoking cessation in the belief that they may reduce nicotine withdrawal symptoms.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this review are to determine the effectiveness of acupuncture and the related interventions of acupressure, laser therapy and electrostimulation in smoking cessation, in comparison with no intervention, sham treatment, or other interventions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register (which includes trials of smoking cessation interventions identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO) and AMED in October 2013. We also searched four Chinese databases in September 2013: Sino-Med, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data and VIP.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized trials comparing a form of acupuncture, acupressure, laser therapy or electrostimulation with either no intervention, sham treatment or another intervention for smoking cessation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data in duplicate on the type of smokers recruited, the nature of the intervention and control procedures, the outcome measures, method of randomization, and completeness of follow-up.We assessed abstinence from smoking at the earliest time-point (before six weeks) and at the last measurement point between six months and one year. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence for each trial, and biochemically validated rates if available. Those lost to follow-up were counted as continuing smokers. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis pooling risk ratios using a fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 38 studies. Based on three studies, acupuncture was not shown to be more effective than a waiting list control for long-term abstinence, with wide confidence intervals and evidence of heterogeneity (n = 393, risk ratio [RR] 1.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.98 to 3.28, I² = 57%). Compared with sham acupuncture, the RR for the short-term effect of acupuncture was 1.22 (95% CI 1.08 to 1.38), and for the long-term effect was 1.10 (95% CI 0.86 to 1.40). The studies were not judged to be free from bias, and there was evidence of funnel plot asymmetry with larger studies showing smaller effects. The heterogeneity between studies was not explained by the technique used. Acupuncture was less effective than nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). There was no evidence that acupuncture is superior to psychological interventions in the short- or long-term. There is limited evidence that acupressure is superior to sham acupressure for short-term outcomes (3 trials, n = 325, RR 2.54, 95% CI 1.27 to 5.08), but no trials reported long-term effects, The pooled estimate for studies testing an intervention that included continuous auricular stimulation suggested a short-term benefit compared to sham stimulation (14 trials, n = 1155, RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.32 to 2.16); subgroup analysis showed an effect for continuous acupressure (7 studies, n = 496, RR 2.73, 95% CI 1.78 to 4.18) but not acupuncture with indwelling needles (6 studies, n = 659, RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.69). At longer follow-up the CIs did not exclude no effect (5 trials, n = 570, RR 1.47, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.74). The evidence from two trials using laser stimulation was inconsistent and could not be combined. The combined evidence on electrostimulation suggests it is not superior to sham electrostimulation (short-term abstinence: 6 trials, n = 634, RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.46; long-term abstinence: 2 trials, n = 405, RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.23).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Although pooled estimates suggest possible short-term effects there is no consistent, bias-free evidence that acupuncture, acupressure, or laser therapy have a sustained benefit on smoking cessation for six months or more. However, lack of evidence and methodological problems mean that no firm conclusions can be drawn. Electrostimulation is not effective for smoking cessation. Well-designed research into acupuncture, acupressure and laser stimulation is justified since these are popular interventions and safe when correctly applied, though these interventions alone are likely to be less effective than evidence-based interventions.