Efficacy of auricular therapy for pain management: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Chao Hsing Yeh, Yi Chien Chiang, Samuel L. Hoffman, Zhan Liang, Mary Lou Klem, Wilson W S Tam, Lung Chang Chien, Lorna Kwai Ping Suen

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Abstract

Objective. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy of auricular therapy by including a sham therapy control group. Methods. Relevant, randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were identified by searching medical related databases from, depending on journal, 1900 (at the earliest) to 1994 (at the latest) through May 2013. The outcome measure was a pain intensity score. Results. Twenty-two RCTs were identified and 13 RCTs were included for meta-analysis. In these studies, auricular therapy provided significant pain relief when compared to a sham or control group. The overall standardized mean differences (SMD) was 1.59 (95% CI [-2.36, -0.82]) (13 trials, total subject numbers = 806), indicating that, on average, the mean decrease in pain score for auricular therapy group was 1.59 standard deviations greater than the mean decrease for the sham control. In terms of the efficacy of the different treatment methods, auricular acupressure boasts the largest strength of evidence for pain relief, followed by auricular acupuncture. Electroacupuncture stimulation did not show significant evidence for efficacy, which may be due to the small sample size (i.e., only 19 subjects were included). Conclusion. Further large-scale RCTs are needed to determine the efficacy of auricular therapy for pain.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number934670
JournalEvidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine
Volume2014
DOIs
StatePublished - 2014
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Pain Management
Meta-Analysis
Pain
Randomized Controlled Trials
Ear Acupuncture
Acupressure
Therapeutics
Electroacupuncture
Control Groups
Group Psychotherapy
Sample Size
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Databases

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Complementary and alternative medicine

Cite this

Efficacy of auricular therapy for pain management : A systematic review and meta-analysis. / Yeh, Chao Hsing; Chiang, Yi Chien; Hoffman, Samuel L.; Liang, Zhan; Klem, Mary Lou; Tam, Wilson W S; Chien, Lung Chang; Suen, Lorna Kwai Ping.

In: Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine, Vol. 2014, 934670, 2014.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Yeh, Chao Hsing ; Chiang, Yi Chien ; Hoffman, Samuel L. ; Liang, Zhan ; Klem, Mary Lou ; Tam, Wilson W S ; Chien, Lung Chang ; Suen, Lorna Kwai Ping. / Efficacy of auricular therapy for pain management : A systematic review and meta-analysis. In: Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine. 2014 ; Vol. 2014.
@article{9764f86871d94825b74f1dfbf2458e45,
title = "Efficacy of auricular therapy for pain management: A systematic review and meta-analysis",
abstract = "Objective. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy of auricular therapy by including a sham therapy control group. Methods. Relevant, randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were identified by searching medical related databases from, depending on journal, 1900 (at the earliest) to 1994 (at the latest) through May 2013. The outcome measure was a pain intensity score. Results. Twenty-two RCTs were identified and 13 RCTs were included for meta-analysis. In these studies, auricular therapy provided significant pain relief when compared to a sham or control group. The overall standardized mean differences (SMD) was 1.59 (95{\%} CI [-2.36, -0.82]) (13 trials, total subject numbers = 806), indicating that, on average, the mean decrease in pain score for auricular therapy group was 1.59 standard deviations greater than the mean decrease for the sham control. In terms of the efficacy of the different treatment methods, auricular acupressure boasts the largest strength of evidence for pain relief, followed by auricular acupuncture. Electroacupuncture stimulation did not show significant evidence for efficacy, which may be due to the small sample size (i.e., only 19 subjects were included). Conclusion. Further large-scale RCTs are needed to determine the efficacy of auricular therapy for pain.",
author = "Yeh, {Chao Hsing} and Chiang, {Yi Chien} and Hoffman, {Samuel L.} and Zhan Liang and Klem, {Mary Lou} and Tam, {Wilson W S} and Chien, {Lung Chang} and Suen, {Lorna Kwai Ping}",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1155/2014/934670",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "2014",
journal = "Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine",
issn = "1741-427X",
publisher = "Hindawi Publishing Corporation",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Efficacy of auricular therapy for pain management

T2 - A systematic review and meta-analysis

AU - Yeh, Chao Hsing

AU - Chiang, Yi Chien

AU - Hoffman, Samuel L.

AU - Liang, Zhan

AU - Klem, Mary Lou

AU - Tam, Wilson W S

AU - Chien, Lung Chang

AU - Suen, Lorna Kwai Ping

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Objective. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy of auricular therapy by including a sham therapy control group. Methods. Relevant, randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were identified by searching medical related databases from, depending on journal, 1900 (at the earliest) to 1994 (at the latest) through May 2013. The outcome measure was a pain intensity score. Results. Twenty-two RCTs were identified and 13 RCTs were included for meta-analysis. In these studies, auricular therapy provided significant pain relief when compared to a sham or control group. The overall standardized mean differences (SMD) was 1.59 (95% CI [-2.36, -0.82]) (13 trials, total subject numbers = 806), indicating that, on average, the mean decrease in pain score for auricular therapy group was 1.59 standard deviations greater than the mean decrease for the sham control. In terms of the efficacy of the different treatment methods, auricular acupressure boasts the largest strength of evidence for pain relief, followed by auricular acupuncture. Electroacupuncture stimulation did not show significant evidence for efficacy, which may be due to the small sample size (i.e., only 19 subjects were included). Conclusion. Further large-scale RCTs are needed to determine the efficacy of auricular therapy for pain.

AB - Objective. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy of auricular therapy by including a sham therapy control group. Methods. Relevant, randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were identified by searching medical related databases from, depending on journal, 1900 (at the earliest) to 1994 (at the latest) through May 2013. The outcome measure was a pain intensity score. Results. Twenty-two RCTs were identified and 13 RCTs were included for meta-analysis. In these studies, auricular therapy provided significant pain relief when compared to a sham or control group. The overall standardized mean differences (SMD) was 1.59 (95% CI [-2.36, -0.82]) (13 trials, total subject numbers = 806), indicating that, on average, the mean decrease in pain score for auricular therapy group was 1.59 standard deviations greater than the mean decrease for the sham control. In terms of the efficacy of the different treatment methods, auricular acupressure boasts the largest strength of evidence for pain relief, followed by auricular acupuncture. Electroacupuncture stimulation did not show significant evidence for efficacy, which may be due to the small sample size (i.e., only 19 subjects were included). Conclusion. Further large-scale RCTs are needed to determine the efficacy of auricular therapy for pain.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84923305733&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84923305733&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1155/2014/934670

DO - 10.1155/2014/934670

M3 - Review article

C2 - 25165482

AN - SCOPUS:84923305733

VL - 2014

JO - Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine

JF - Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine

SN - 1741-427X

M1 - 934670

ER -