Search

Abstract Background Low back pain has become a globally challenging health problem, and about 90% of cases are nonspecific. Due to the risks associated with opioid use and the limited effectiveness of drug treatment, acupuncture and other non-drug methods have become the first-line treatment for this disease. However, the best acupuncture method has not yet been determined. In this study, the effects of different acupuncture methods on chronic nonspecific low back pain (CNLBP) were compared by network meta-analysis, aiming at identifying the best option and providing a basis for precise treatment of CNLBP. Methods Clinical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on acupuncture in the treatment of NSLBP were searched in eight databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Sinomed, CNKI, Wanfang Data and VIP from the inception of databases to January 21, 2024. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool 2.0 (RoB 2.0) and Stata 15.0 (Stata Corp, College Station, Texas, USA) were used to evaluate the literature quality and meta-analysis, and the evidence quality was assessed based on GRADE guidelines. This systematic review was registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews. Results A total of 27 articles were included, involving 2579 patients. The results of the network meta-analysis showed that the top three treatment schemes were warm needle acupuncture, intensive silver needle therapy and meridian-sinew theory-based treatment. In terms of relieving pain, the top three treatments were electrical warm needling, intensive silver needle therapy and warm needle acupuncture. In improving mobility, the top three were meridian-sinew theory-based treatment, routine acupuncture and electroacupuncture. Conclusion For CNLBP patients, warm needle acupuncture, electrical warm needling and meridian-sinew theory-based treatment are mainly recommended. If patients have significant pain, electroacupuncture is strongly suggested. On the contrary, for patients with decreased joint mobility, meridian-sinew theory-based treatment is advocated.

Abstract Background To investigate whether respectively radial extracoporeal shock wave therapy (rESWT) or a combination of rESWT, celecoxib and eperisone (rESWT + C + E) are superior in reducing pain in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain (cnsLBP) compared to C + E alone (a standard treatment of this condition in China). Methods 140 patients with cnsLBP were randomly allocated to rESWT (n = 47), rESWT + C + E (n = 45) or C + E alone (n = 48) for four weeks between November 2017 and March 2019. Outcome was evaluated using the Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ), Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire and Patient Health Questionnaire 9, collected at baseline as well as one week (W1), W2, W3, W4 and W12 after baseline. Results All scores showed a statistically significant improvement over time. The PSEQ and NRS scores showed a significant Time × Treatment effect. Patients treated with rESWT had significantly lower mean NRS values than patients treated with rESWT + C + E at W1 and W3, as well as than patients treated with C + E alone at W3 and W4. No severe adverse events were observed. Conclusions rESWT may not be inferior to respectively rESWT + C + E or C + E alone in reducing pain in patients with cnsLBP. Level of Evidence: Level I, prospective, randomized, active-controlled trial. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier NCT03337607. Registered November 09, 2017, https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03337607 . Level of evidence Level I; prospective, randomized, controlled trial.