A randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study of acupressure wristbands for the prevention of nausea and vomiting during labour and delivery

Efficacy and safety of acupressure in nausea and vomiting during pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of acupressure on nausea and vomiting during pregnancy.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Springer, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched for all randomized controlled trials (RCT) of treating nausea and vomiting during pregnancy by acupressure from the inception date of database to July 31st, 2023. Study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were conducted independently by researchers. The methodological quality of included studies was evaluated by the Cochrane Collaboration's bias risk assessment tool, meta-analysis by Stata 17.0 software, and publication bias by Begg's test.

RESULTS

A total of 11 RCTs involving 1378 pregnant women were included in this review, which was assessed to be moderate quality. 10 RCTs involving 1298 pregnant women were assessed for the meta-analysis. The results revealed that acupressure showed significant difference on improvement in symptom score compared with sham acupressure (pooled MD, - 1.33; 95%CI [- 2.06, - 0.61]; P < 0.001) or control group (pooled MD, - 0.73; 95%CI [- 1.08, - 0.39]; P < 0.001), and incidence of effective rate compared with sham acupressure group (pooled RR, 1.78; 95%CI [1.03, 3.07]; P = 0.039). However, no statistical significance was found between acupressure and control group (pooled RR, 4.53; 95%CI [0.67, 30.48]; P = 0.120) on effective rate. On comparing acupressure with sham acupressure, there was no beneficial effect on preventing nausea and vomiting during pregnancy (pooled RR, 0.83; 95%CI [0.50, 1.38]; P = 0.476), shortening the duration of hospital stay (pooled MD, - 0.78; 95%CI [- 1.98, 0.41]; P = 0.199) and improving patient satisfaction (pooled RR, 1.36; 95%CI [0.47, 3.91]; P = 0.570). Begg's test did not reveal any publication bias. Only one RCT reported minimal acupressure-related adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Acupressure may have potential favorable or encouraging effect on treating nausea and vomiting during pregnancy, but strong supportive data are not yet available. Well-designed and large-scale RCTs should be conducted for assessing and confirming the efficacy and safety of acupressure in nausea and vomiting during pregnancy.

The Efficacy of Acupressure for Nausea and Vomiting After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Meta-analysis Study

OBJECTIVES

This meta-analysis aims to explore the impact of acupressure on nausea and vomiting for patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

BACKGROUND

Acupressure may have some potential in managing nausea and vomiting after LC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, EBSCO, and Cochrane library databases were systematically searched, and we included randomized controlled trials assessing the effect of acupressure on nausea and vomiting for LC.

RESULTS

Six randomized controlled trials were finally included in the meta-analysis. Overall, compared with control intervention for LC, acupressure was associated with significantly reduced incidence of nausea at 2 hours [odds ratio (OR) = 0.37; 95% CI = 0.21-0.67; P = 0.001] and nausea at 6 hours (OR = 0.38; 95% CI = 0.22-0.66; P = 0.0006; Fig. 4), and decreased need of rescue antiemetic (OR = 0.41; 95% CI = 0.20-0.85; P = 0.02; Fig. 8), but demonstrated no obvious impact on vomiting at 2 hours (OR = 0.76; 95% CI = 0.28-2.10; P = 0.60), vomiting at 6 hours (OR = 0.49, 95% CI = 0.20-1.20; P = 0.12), nausea at 24 hours (OR = 0.71; 95% CI = 0.37-1.35; P = 0.30), or vomiting at 24 hours (OR = 0.81; 95% CI = 0.28-2.35; P = 0.69).

CONCLUSIONS

Acupressure is effective in controlling nausea and decreasing rescue antiemetics for LC.

Effect of acupressure application on patients' nausea, vomiting, pain, and sleep quality after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A randomized placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Nausea, vomiting, pain and insomnia in the postoperative period may cause discomfort, and this may adversely affect the patient's compliance with the treatment. This study was conducted to determine the effect of acupressure on nausea, vomiting, pain, and sleep quality after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

METHODS

This was a randomized controlled experimental study with a placebo group. The sample comprised 188 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy (control:64;experimental:64;and placebo:60). Acupressure was performed on the experimental and placebo groups with a wristband for 24 hours. The data were collected at the 0th, 2nd, 6th, 12th, and 24th postoperative hours. Data were collected using the patient introduction form, numeric nausea scale, visual analog scale(VAS), verbal category scale(VCS), and Richards-campbell sleep questionnaire(RCSQ).

RESULT

The difference between the mean scores of nausea severity and the presence of nausea at the postoperative 0-2, 2-6, and 12-24 hours was statistically significant between the groups and the presence and the severity of nausea was lower in the experimental group (p<0.05). Although not statistically significant, less vomiting was observed in the experimental group patients compared to the control group patients at postoperative 0-2, 2-6, and 12-24 hours. There was no significant difference between the mean VAS and VCS scores of the groups at postoperative 2nd, 6th, and 24th hours (p >0.05). The mean RCSQ total scores of the patients in the experimental group were significantly higher (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Acupressure applied to the PC6 point after laparoscopic cholecystectomy reduced postoperative nausea and vomiting and positively affected sleep quality.

The efficacy and safety of complementary and alternative medicine in the treatment of nausea and vomiting during pregnancy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) therapies are widely used for nausea and vomiting during pregnancy (NVP) due to the limitations of conventional medicine. However, their efficacy and safety remain controversial. Therefore, this meta-analysis was performed to assess the improvement of CAM therapy on NVP.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were searched for where the trial group was CAM and the control group was a conventional medicine or a placebo for NVP. This was done via 8 databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, SinoMed, and VIP, from inception to October 25, 2022. The Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to assess the quality of evidence. The Stata 15.0 software was used to perform the meta-analysis.

Results

Thirty-three RCTs were included in this study. The acupuncture treatment was superior to conventional medicine at the effective rate [RR = 1.71, 95% CI (1.02, 2.86), P = 0.042; Low-quality evidence]. Ginger had more significant effects than conventional medicine at the Rhodes index [WMD = −0.52, 95% CI (−0.79, −0.24), P ≤ 0.001; Moderate-quality evidence] and it had the same effect as drugs to relieve vomiting [SMD = 0.30, 95% CI (−0.12, 0.73), P = 0.160; Low-quality evidence]. Compared with placebo, ginger had a higher effective rate [RR = 1.68, 95% CI (1.09, 2.57), P = 0.018; Low-quality evidence], and lower Visual analog scale (VAS) of Nausea [WMD = −1.21, 95% CI (−2.34, −0.08), P = 0.036; Low-quality evidence]. Ginger had the same antiemetic effect as placebo [WMD = 0.05, 95% CI (−0.23, 0.32), P = 0.743; Low-quality evidence]. Acupressure was superior to conventional medicine at the reduction of antiemetic drugs [SMD = −0.44, 95% CI (−0.77, −0.11), P = 0.008; Low-quality evidence], and at the effective rate [RR = 1.55, 95% CI (1.30, 1.86), P ≤ 0.001; Low-quality evidence]. Acupressure had the same effect as placebo at the effective rate [RR = 1.25, 95% CI (0.94, 1.65), P = 0.124; Low-quality evidence]. Overall, CAM therapy was safer than conventional medicine or a placebo.

Conclusion

The results showed that CAM therapies were able to alleviate NVP. However, due to the low quality of existing RCTs, more RCTs with large sample sizes are needed to validate this conclusion in the future.

Acupressure and Acupuncture Use in the Peripartum Period

Acupuncture is the procedure of inserting fine needles into specific points on the body for therapeutic purposes. Acupuncture and its derivatives (acupressure, moxibustion, electroacupuncture, and transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation on acupoints) are a popular treatment choice in the peripartum period (32 wk' gestation to 14 d postdelivery). There is substantial research evidence supporting acupuncture and its derivatives in the peripartum period. Benefits in the use of acupressure to reduce labor pain intensity and a reduction in the duration of labor with acupressure have been found. There is mixed evidence for the use of both moxibustion and moxibustion with acupuncture for noncephalic presentations and for acupressure for reducing intraoperative nausea. There is limited evidence available on acupuncture use in women with high-risk pregnancies or multifetal gestations.

Contemporary acupressure therapy: Adroit cure for painless recovery of therapeutic ailments

Since time immemorial, complementary and alternative medicines (CAM) have played a significant role in human health care. CAM is known to have a strong reputation and reliability within every culture to provide basic health care treatment for patients. CAM acts as a better therapeutic option in human being for treating various diseases and improving quality of life with apt consideration to the economic aspects. Acupressure, one of the known CAM, originated in ancient China is based on the principal of acupoints activation across the meridians which correct the imbalance between Qi. Activation of specific points on the meridians is known to facilitate reduction of pain at the local sites. It also reduces the pain from other body parts. This review outlines various types, devices and mechanisms involved in the acupressure treatment.

Stimulation of the wrist acupuncture point PC6 for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting

BACKGROUND

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are common complications following surgery and anaesthesia. Antiemetic drugs are only partially effective in preventing PONV. An alternative approach is to stimulate the PC6 acupoint on the wrist. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2004, updated in 2009 and now in 2015.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness and safety of PC6 acupoint stimulation with or without antiemetic drug versus sham or antiemetic drug for the prevention of PONV in people undergoing surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Cochrane Library, Issue 12, 2014), MEDLINE (January 2008 to December 2014), EMBASE (January 2008 to December 2014), ISI Web of Science (January 2008 to December 2014), World Health Organization Clinical Trials Registry, ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists of articles to identify additional studies. We applied no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomized trials of techniques that stimulated the PC6 acupoint compared with sham treatment or drug therapy, or combined PC6 acupoint and drug therapy compared to drug therapy, for the prevention of PONV. Interventions used in these trials included acupuncture, electro-acupuncture, transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation, transcutaneous nerve stimulation, laser stimulation, capsicum plaster, acu-stimulation device, and acupressure in people undergoing surgery. Primary outcomes were the incidences of nausea and vomiting after surgery. Secondary outcomes were the need for rescue antiemetic therapy and adverse effects.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias domains for each trial. We used a random-effects model and reported risk ratio (RR) with associated 95% confidence interval (95% CI). We used trial sequential analyses to help provide information on when we had reached firm evidence in cumulative meta-analyses of the primary outcomes, based on a 30% risk ratio reduction in PONV.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 59 trials involving 7667 participants. We rated two trials at low risk of bias in all domains (selection, attrition, reporting, blinding and other). We rated 25 trials at high risk in one or more risk-of-bias domains. Compared with sham treatment, PC6 acupoint stimulation significantly reduced the incidence of nausea (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.77; 40 trials, 4742 participants), vomiting (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.71; 45 trials, 5147 participants) and the need for rescue antiemetics (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.73; 39 trials, 4622 participants). As heterogeneity among trials was substantial and there were study limitations, we rated the quality of evidence as low. Using trial sequential analysis, the required information size and boundary for benefit were reached for both primary outcomes.PC6 acupoint stimulation was compared with six different types of antiemetic drugs (metoclopramide, cyclizine, prochlorperazine, droperidol. ondansetron and dexamethasone). There was no difference between PC6 acupoint stimulation and antiemetic drugs in the incidence of nausea (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.10; 14 trials, 1332 participants), vomiting (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.17; 19 trials, 1708 participants), or the need for rescue antiemetics (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.16; 9 trials, 895 participants). We rated the quality of evidence as moderate, due to the study limitations. Using trial sequential analyses, the futility boundary was crossed before the required information size was surpassed for both primary outcomes.Compared to antiemetic drugs, the combination of PC6 acupoint stimulation and antiemetic therapy reduced the incidence of vomiting (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.91; 9 trials, 687 participants) but not nausea (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.13; 8 trials, 642 participants). We rated the quality of evidence as very low, due to substantial heterogeneity among trials, study limitations and imprecision. Using trial sequential analysis, none of the boundaries for benefit, harm or futility were crossed for PONV. The need for rescue antiemetic was lower in the combination PC6 acupoint stimulation and antiemetic group than the antiemetic group (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.86; 5 trials, 419 participants).The side effects associated with PC6 acupoint stimulation were minor, transient and self-limiting (e.g. skin irritation, blistering, redness and pain) in 14 trials. Publication bias was not apparent in the contour-enhanced funnel plots.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is low-quality evidence supporting the use of PC6 acupoint stimulation over sham. Compared to the last update in 2009, no further sham comparison trials are needed. We found that there is moderate-quality evidence showing no difference between PC6 acupoint stimulation and antiemetic drugs to prevent PONV. Further PC6 acupoint stimulation versus antiemetic trials are futile in showing a significant difference, which is a new finding in this update. There is inconclusive evidence supporting the use of a combined strategy of PC6 acupoint stimulation and antiemetic drug over drug prophylaxis, and further high-quality trials are needed.

Sham Acupressure Controls Used in Randomized Controlled Trials: A Systematic Review and Critique

OBJECTIVES

To explore the commonly utilized sham acupressure procedures in existing acupressure trials, and to assess whether different types of sham interventions yield different therapeutic outcomes, and, as far as possible, to identify directions for the future development of an adequate sham acupressure method.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials comparing true acupressure with sham interventions were included. Thirteen electronic databases were adopted to locate relevant studies from inception to July 3, 2014. Meanwhile, eight Chinese journals on complementary and alternative medicine were manually searched to locate eligible articles. In addition, eligible studies listed in the reference lists of the included papers and other related systematic reviews on acupressure were also screened to further search any potentially eligible trials. Methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated using the risk of bias assessment tool developed by the Cochrane Back Review Group. Descriptive analysis was adopted to summarize the therapeutic outcomes.

RESULTS

Sixty-six studies with 7265 participants were included. Methodological quality of the included trials was generally satisfactory. Six types of sham acupressure approaches were identified and "non-acupoint" stimulation was the most frequently utilized sham point while an acupressure device was the most commonly used approach for administering sham treatments. Acupressure therapy was a beneficial approach in managing a variety of health problems and the therapeutic effect was found to be more effective in the true acupressure groups than that in the sham comparative groups. No clear association could be identified between different sham acupressure modalities and the reported treatment outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

A great diversity of sham acupressure controls have been used in clinical practice and research. A solid conclusion whether different sham alternatives are related to different treatment outcomes cannot be derived because of significant clinical heterogeneity among the analyzed trials. Non-acupoints are generally recommended but the definite locations should be identified with caution. For studies using single sham acupoints on hands or legs, it is suggested to apply identical acupressure devices on the same acupoint as in the active intervention without any stimulation. While for studies on pain, stimulation of sham acupoints should be avoided.

Analysis and Thoughts about the Negative Results of International Clinical Trials on Acupuncture

An increasing number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of acupuncture have proved the clinical benefits of acupuncture; however, there are some results that have shown negative results or placebo effects. The paper carried out an in-depth analysis on 33 RCTs in the 2011 SCI database, the quality of the reports was judged according to Jadad scores, and the "Necessary Information Included in Reporting Interventions in Clinical Trials of Acupuncture (STRICTA 2010)" was taken as the standard to analyze the rationality of the therapeutic principle. The difference between the methodology (Jadad) scores of the two types of research reports did not constitute statistical significance (P > 0.05). The studies with negative results or placebo effects showed the following deficiencies with respect to intervention details: (1) incompletely rational acupoint selection; (2) inconsistent ability of acupuncturists; (3) negligible needling response to needling; (4) acupuncture treatment frequency too low in most studies; and (5) irrational setting of placebo control. Thus, the primary basis for the negative results or placebo effects of international clinical trials on acupuncture is not in the quality of the methodology, but in noncompliance with the essential requirements proposed by acupuncture theory in terms of clinical manipulation details.

The Outcomes of Complementary and Alternative Medicine Use among Pregnant and Birthing Women: Current Trends and Future Directions

Complementary and alternative medicine is used by a substantial number of pregnant women and maternity care providers are often faced with the task of ensuring women are using safe and effective treatments while respecting a woman's right to autonomous decision-making. In the era of evidence-based medicine maternity health professionals are expected to draw upon the best available evidence when making clinical decisions and providing health advice. This review will outline the current trends in research evidence associated with the outcomes of complementary and alternative medicine use amongst pregnant and birthing women as well as highlight some potential directions for future development in this important yet largely unknown topic in contemporary maternity care.

The effectiveness of acupressure for the control and management of chemotherapy-related acute and delayed nausea: a randomized controlled trial

CONTEXT

Both positive and negative results have been reported in the literature from the use of acupressure at the P6 point, providing evidence of highly suggestive but not conclusive results.

OBJECTIVES

To clarify whether acupressure is effective in the management of chemotherapy-related nausea and vomiting.

METHODS

A randomized, three-group, sham-controlled trial was designed. Patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy were randomized to receive standardized antiemetics and acupressure wristbands, sham acupressure wristbands, or antiemetics alone. Primary outcome assessment (nausea) was carried out daily for seven days per chemotherapy cycle over four cycles. Secondary outcomes included vomiting, psychological distress, and quality of life.

RESULTS

Five hundred patients were randomized. Primary outcome analysis (nausea in Cycle 1) revealed no statistically significant differences between the three groups, although nausea levels in the proportion of patients using wristbands (both real and sham) were somewhat lower than those in the proportion of patients using antiemetics-only group. Adjusting for gender, age, and emetic risk of chemotherapy, the odds ratio of lower nausea experience was 1.18 and 1.42 for the acupressure and sham acupressure groups, respectively. A gender interaction effect was evident (P = 0.002). No significant differences were detected in relation to vomiting, anxiety, and quality-of-life measures.

CONCLUSION

No clear recommendations can be made about the use of acupressure wristbands in the management of chemotherapy-related nausea and vomiting as results did not reach statistical significance. However, the study provided evidence of encouraging signals in relation to improved nausea experience and warrants further consideration in both practice and further clinical trials.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered with the ISRCT register, number ISRCTN87604299.

Acupressure and ginger to relieve nausea and vomiting in pregnancy: a randomized study

BACKGROUND

Nausea and vomiting of pregnancy (NVP) is the most common medical condition of pregnancy, affecting up to 85% of expecting mothers. NVP can have serious adverse effects on the quality of a woman's life, social, and domestic functioning, and her general well-being. Therefore, it is very important to treat this condition.

OBJECTIVES

The effectiveness of ginger and acupressure in the treatment of NVP was compared in the present study.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

159 eligible pregnant women with symptoms of mild to moderate nausea and/or vomiting before 16 weeks gestational age participated in a 7-day clinical trial. They were divided randomly into three groups: the acupressure, ginger, and control. Participants did not receive any intervention for three days and interventions were performed for the women in acupressure and ginger groups for four days. No intervention was performed for the control group. Data was collected by self-recorded symptoms according to the Rhodes index. Data was analyzed by ANOVA, Kruskal-Wallis, Chi-square, and Fisher exact tests for quantitative and qualitative variables.

RESULTS

There were no statistical differences in the baseline demographics between the three groups. ANOVA test showed that there were significantly differences in mean difference Rhodes index scores (vomiting, nausea, retching and total score) in the three groups (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Ginger is more effective than acupressure to relieve mild to moderate nausea and vomiting in symptomatic pregnant women in less than 16 weeks of gestational age.