Search

Objective. This study aimed to develop a scale for evaluating and grading the evidence of prevention and treatment in ancient books of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), in view of providing a reference for TCM clinicians, supporting the compilation or revision of evidence-based practice guidelines for TCM, improving the level of evidence-based research on ancient TCM books, and supplementing the development of evidence-based ancient TCM books. Methods. The Delphi method was used for consultation among 40 experts in relevant fields. Excel 2016 and SPSS 21.0 were used to analyze the positive coefficient, authority coefficient, degree of concentration, degree of coordination, and degree of expert consensus. Results. In the first round of the questionnaire, a total of 17 evaluation indexes were formulated in three aspects: 5 were deleted, 1 was modified according to the expert opinions, and no additional index was added. In addition, quantitative standards, weight assignment, and grading standards were developed according to the findings of the expert consultation. The positive coefficients of experts in the first and second rounds of questionnaires were 87.5% and 82.9%, respectively. The authority coefficient was 0.835 (>0.7). The coefficient of variation of the first and second rounds were 0.14∼0.29 and 0.09∼0.27, respectively. Kendall's coefficient of concordance of the first and second rounds were 0.135 (p < 0.05) and 0.081 (p < 0.05), respectively. Conclusion. The evaluation indexes and quantitative reference values of the developed scale conform to the characteristics of prevention and treatment evidence in ancient TCM books. It can provide a useful exploration tool for the evaluation and grading of evidences in TCM ancient books. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Acupuncture has pain-relief effects, but no data were available on the use of transcutaneous electric acupoint stimulation (TEAS) in pain relief during oocyte retrieval. This study was designed to examine the effect of TEAS for pain relief in women undergoing transvaginal ultrasound-guided oocyte aspiration. This single-blinded, multicenter, randomized controlled trial was performed in China between May 2013 and May 2015. The subjects were randomized to mock TEAS and TEAS. TEAS or mock TEAS was administered 30 min before oocyte retrieval until the end of the operation. The primary and secondary endpoints were the pain measured using the visual analog scale (VAS) within 1 min and 1 hour after oocyte retrieval, respectively. Serum β-endorphin levels were tested in the first 50 patients/group. 390 women were undergoing oocyte retrieval. Pain levels evaluated using VAS within 1 min (18.6 ± 1.3 vs. 24.4 ± 1.7, P < 0.01) and 1 h after oocyte aspiration (4.6 ± 0.7 vs. 6.8 ± 0.8, P < 0.05) were lower in the TEAS group than in the mock TEAS group. Nausea assessment revealed a significantly lower VAS score in the TEAS group within 1 min (1.2 ± 0.4 vs. 2.9 ± 0.7, P < 0.033). Serum β-endorphin levels were significantly higher in the TEAS group than in the mock TEAS group (11.4 ± 0.5 vs. 9.1 ± 0.4, P < 0.001) after retrieval. Serum β-endorphin levels were higher in the TEAS group after the procedure than baseline (11.4 ± 0.5 vs. 9.1 ± 0.3, P < 0.001). Oocyte retrieval causes pain and discomfort, but TEAS is effective and safe for suppressing the pain and alleviating nausea associated with the operation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]