Author: Garcia MK1, McQuade J, Lee R, Haddad R, Spano M, Cohen L.
Affiliation: Garcia MK1, McQuade J, Lee R, Haddad R, Spano M, Cohen L.
Conference/Journal: Curr Oncol Rep.
Date published: 2014 Dec
Other:
Volume ID: 16 , Issue ID: 12 , Pages: 418 , Special Notes: doi: 10.1007/s11912-014-0418-9. , Word Count: 147
In a previous systematic review of the worldwide literature of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving needle insertion into acupuncture points for symptom management in cancer patients, we identified only one high-quality RCT that was deemed to have a low risk of bias. Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane (all databases), Scopus, and PubMed were searched from inception through December 2011 with no language limits applied. A total of 41 RCTs met all inclusion criteria and were rated. In the current review, we examined 18 trials published since our last report. The purpose of this update was to emphasize important recent findings and discuss how concerns such as blinding, separating non-specific placebo effects from specific needling effects, determining biologic mechanisms and dosing parameters, evaluating determinants of response such as expectation, controlling for sources of bias, and the lack of standardization in treatment and study methods may affect the interpretation of study results.
PMID: 25325937