Effect of Acupuncture Intervention and Manipulation Types on Poststroke Dysarthria: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Table 3

Meta-ANOVA results of acupuncture treatments for dysarthria according to manipulation types.

Manipulation type	Number of groups	Effect size and 95% CI			Test for heterogeneity		Test for subgroup differences
		Risk ratio	Lower limit	Upper limit	Q-value	I^2 (%)	Q-value (DoF)	value
Number of needles	Large (n = 7)	1.318	1.169	1.485	11.39	47.3	0.29 (1)	0.592
	Small (n = 8)	1.371	1.261	1.490	9.230	24.1
Distribution of needles	Local (n = 12)	1.350	1.247	1.463	18.32	40.0	0.03 (1)	0.867
	Broad (n = 3)	1.328	1.108	1.593	3.890	48.6
Bleeding of sublingual veins	Bleeding (n = 12)	1.380	1.281	1.488	14.38	23.5	2.02 (1)	0.155
	Nonbleeding (n = 3)	1.233	1.075	1.413	3.69	45.8
Intensity of manipulation	Strong (n = 13)	1.341	1.257	1.431	14.40	16.7	0.17 (1)	0.681
	Weak (n = 2)	1.509	0.863	2.641	7.39	86.5
Depth of needling	Deep (n = 6)	1.239	1.142	1.325	4.95	0.0	3.74 (1)	0.053
	Superficial (n = 9)	1.402	1.276	1.540	13.47	40.6
Repetition of manipulation	Repetition (n = 8)	1.355	1.240	1.482	11.44	38.8	0.04 (1)	0.835
	Nonrepetition (n = 7)	1.334	1.180	1.508	10.73	44.1

CI: confidence interval, DoF: degrees of freedom.