Efficacy and safety of electroacupuncture combined with medication for rheumatoid arthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Issue 3 (March 2023)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Feng, Yun; Zhang, Rui; Zhao, Zhenni; He, Yanyan; Pang, Xiangtian; Wang, Danwen; Sun, Zhiling
• Is Part Of: Heliyon. Volume 9:Issue 3(2023)
• Publication Date: 2023-03
• Subjects: Electroacupuncture (EA) -- Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) -- Clinical efficacy -- Meta-analysis; Research -- Periodicals; Medical sciences -- Periodicals; Natural history -- Periodicals; Social sciences -- Periodicals; Earth sciences -- Periodicals; Physical sciences -- Periodicals; 507.2
• DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e14014
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2405-8440

Abstract

Abstract: Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of electroacupuncture (EA) combined with medication on clinical efficacy, pain scores (Visual Analogue Scale, [VAS]), Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28), C-reactive protein (CRP), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and adverse events in treating patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, SinoMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, and VIP until December 12, 2021 was used to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the EA treatment of RA. Study selection and data extraction were performed critically and independently by two reviewers. Cochrane criteria for risk of bias was used to evaluate the methodological quality of the trials. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Methodology (GRADE) was applied to assess the quality of evidence from quantitative analysis. Results: Seventeen RCTs, including 1317 patients, satisfied the inclusion criteria. Compared with the control group, EA combined with medication had a superior effect on clinical efficacy (RR = 1.25 [95% CI = 1.18 to 1.33], P < 0.00001), VAS score (MD = −1.34 [95% CI = −1.90 to −0.78], P < 0.00001), DAS28 (MD = −0.76 [95% CI = −1.08 to −0.44], P < 0.00001), CRP level (SMD = −1.46 [95% CI = −2.19 to −0.74], P < 0.0001), and ESR (MD = −7.74 [95% CI = −13.77 to −1.72], P = 0.01). Compared with the control group, the meta-analysis showed no significant changes in adverse events in the EA group (RR = 1.08 [95% CI = 0.51 to 2.25], P = 0.85). The evidence level of the results from the 17 studies was very low to moderate. Conclusions: EA combined with medication showed a superior effect than Western medicine alone in clinical efficacy, VAS, DAS28, CRP, and ESR. The clinical safety of EA warrants further investigation in experimental studies.