...
首页> 外文期刊>BJOG: an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology >Acupuncture for pain relief in labour: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
【24h】

Acupuncture for pain relief in labour: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

机译:针灸可减轻劳动中的疼痛:系统评价和荟萃分析。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: Acupuncture is frequently used for pain relief in labour, but the evidence is not clear. OBJECTIVES: To critically evaluate the evidence for or against acupuncture for labour pain management. SEARCH STRATEGY: Nineteen electronic databases, including English, Korean, Japanese, and Chinese databases, were systematically searched. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving women receiving acupuncture alone, or as an adjunct to conventional analgesia, for pain relief in labour were considered. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Pain intensity on a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS; 0, no pain; 100, worst pain) and use of other analgesic methods were used as primary outcomes, and for statistical pooling. Maternal/fetal outcomes were secondary outcomes, and adverse events were also recorded. Risk of bias was assessed regarding randomisation, allocation concealment, blinding, incomplete outcome data, selective outcome reporting, and other biases. MAIN RESULTS: Ten RCTs involving 2038 women were included. VAS for pain intensity data were available in seven studies; the meta-analysis shows that acupuncture was not superior to minimal acupuncture at 1 hour (pooled mean difference -8.02; 95% CI -21.88, 5.84; I(2) = 94%) and at 2 hours (-10.15; 95% CI -23.18, 2.87; I(2) = 92%). Patients reported significantly reduced pain by 4 and 6% during electroacupuncture (EA) treatment at 15 (-4.09; 95% CI -8.05, -0.12) and 30 minutes (-5.94; 95% CI -9.83, -2.06), compared with placebo EA, but the effect was not maintained afterwards. Compared with no intervention, acupuncture reduced pain by only 11% for the first 30 minutes (-10.56; 95% CI -16.08, -5.03). In trials where acupuncture was compared with conventional analgesia, women receiving acupuncture required less meperidine (pooled risk ratio 0.20; 95% CI 0.12, 0.33) and other analgesic methods (0.75; 95% CI 0.66, 0.85). No acupuncture-related adverse events were reported. Most trials did not blind participants, care providers and/or evaluators. AUTHOR'S CONCLUSIONS: The evidence from RCTs does not support the use of acupuncture for controlling labour pain. The primary studies are diverse and often flawed. Further research seems warranted.
机译:背景:针灸常用于减轻产程中的疼痛,但证据尚不清楚。目的:严格评估支持或反对针灸治疗劳动痛的证据。搜索策略:系统搜索了19个电子数据库,包括英语,韩语,日语和中文数据库。选择标准:考虑了所有涉及单独接受针灸或作为常规镇痛的辅助手段以减轻产妇疼痛的妇女的随机对照试验(RCT)。数据收集和分析:以100毫米视觉模拟量表(VAS; 0,无疼痛; 100,最严重疼痛)的疼痛强度和其他镇痛方法的使用作为主要结果,并用于统计汇总。孕产妇/胎儿结局为次要结局,不良事件也有记录。在随机化,分配隐瞒,盲目,不完整的结果数据,选择性的结果报告以及其他偏见方面评估了偏见风险。主要结果:包括10项RCT,涉及2038名妇女。有7项研究提供了用于疼痛强度数据的VAS。荟萃分析显示,在1小时(合并平均差-8.02; 95%CI -21.88,5.84; I(2)= 94%)和2小时(-10.15; 95%CI)时,针灸并没有优于最小针灸-23.18,2.87; I(2)= 92%)。与之相比,患者在15时(-4.09; 95%CI -8.05,-0.12)和30分钟(-5.94; 95%CI -9.83,-2.06)时电针(EA)治疗期间疼痛明显减轻了4%和6%。安慰剂EA,但此后效果未维持。与不进行干预相比,针灸在最初30分钟内仅使疼痛减轻11%(-10.56; 95%CI -16.08,-5.03)。在将针灸与常规镇痛相比较的试验中,接受针灸的妇女需要较少的哌替啶(合并风险比0.20; 95%CI 0.12,0.33)和其他镇痛方法(0.75; 95%CI 0.66,0.85)。没有报告与针灸有关的不良事件。大多数试验并未使参与者,护理提供者和/或评估者致盲。作者的结论:RCT的证据不支持使用针灸来控制劳动痛。初级研究是多种多样的,而且常常有缺陷。似乎需要进一步研究。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号