Acupuncture for Lateral Epicondylitis: A Systematic Review
Table 3
The quality of evidence.
(a) Acupuncture versus sham acupuncture
Quality assessment
Number of patients
Effect
Quality
Importance
Number of studies
Design
Risk of bias
Inconsistency
Indirectness
Imprecision
Other considerations
Acupuncture
Sham acupuncture
Relative (95% CI)
Absolute
Function (follow-up: 14–60 days, measured with scale, range of scores: 10–20, better indicated by lower values)
2
Randomized trials
Serious
No serious inconsistency
No serious indirectness
Serious
None
48
45
—
SMD 0.56 lower (0.98 to 0.15 lower)
Low
Critical
Myodynamia (follow-up: 4 to 60 days, measured with scale, range of scores: 10–20, better indicated by higher values)
2
Randomized trials
Serious
No serious inconsistency
No serious indirectness
Serious
None
48
45
—
SMD 0.44 higher (0.53 to 0.85 higher)
Low
Critical
The trial used the wrong random method, which according to sequence of attendance and the method of allocation concealment is not described. Total population size is less than 400, and effect size is considered a small effect; the upper or lower confidence limit crosses an effect size of 0.5 in either direction.
(b) Acupuncture plus moxibustion with material insulation versus blockage therapy
Quality assessment
Number of patients
Effect
Quality
Importance
Number of studies
Design
Risk of bias
Inconsistency
Indirectness
Imprecision
Other considerations
Acupuncture plus moxibustion with material insulation
Blockage therapy
Relative (95% CI)
Absolute
Function (measured with scales, range of scores: 10–20, better indicated by higher values)
1
Randomized trials
Very serious
No serious inconsistency
No serious indirectness
Serious
None
64
64
—
MD 12.10 higher (10.65 to 13.55 higher)
Very low
Critical
The method of allocation concealment is not described. Total population size is less than 400, and effect size is considered a small effect; the upper or lower confidence limit crosses an effect size of 0.5 in either direction.
(c) Acupuncture plus blockage therapy versus blockage therapy
Quality assessment
Number of patients
Effect
Quality
Importance
Number of studies
Design
Risk of bias
Inconsistency
Indirectness
Imprecision
Other considerations
Acupuncture plus blockage therapy
Blockage therapy
Relative (95% CI)
Absolute
Function (follow-up mean: 12 months, measured with scales, range of scores: 10–20, better indicated by higher values)
1
Randomized trials
Serious1
No serious inconsistency
No serious indirectness
Serious2
None
40
40
—
MD 2 higher (0.96 lower to 4.98 higher)
Low
Critical
Myodynamia (follow-up mean: 12 months, measured with scales, range of scores: 10–20, better indicated by higher values)
1
Randomized trials
Serious1
No serious inconsistency
No serious indirectness
Serious2
None
40
40
—
MD 2 higher (1.11 lower to 5.11 higher)
Low
Critical
The method of allocation concealment is not described. Total population size is less than 400, and effect size is considered a small effect; the upper or lower confidence limit crosses an effect size of 0.5 in either direction.
