Objective: To identify the effectiveness of auricular acupressure(AA) in patients with acute postoperative pain after surgery by systematic review. Methods: A search of randomized controlled trials was conducted in 5 ...Objective: To identify the effectiveness of auricular acupressure(AA) in patients with acute postoperative pain after surgery by systematic review. Methods: A search of randomized controlled trials was conducted in 5 English medical electronic databases and 4 Chinese databases. Two reviewers independently retrieved related studies, assessed the methodological quality, and extracted data with a standardized data form. Meta-analyses were performed using all time-points meta-analysis. Results: A total of 26 studies with 1,682 participants were included. Results showed that compared with conventional therapy, AA significantly improved the total effective rate [risk ratio=1.25, 95% confidence interval(CI), 1.13 to 1.37, P<0.0001; heterogeneity: P<0.0001, I^2=85%]. In the subgroup analysis, the results changed in different follow-up time and surgery categories. The pain relief in the AA group might be the most significant at 72 h after surgery(mean difference=–0.85, 95% CI, –1.20 to –0.50, P<0.0001) and in abdominal surgery(mean difference=–1.15, 95% CI, –1.41 to –0.90, P<0.0001). Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the results of this meta-analysis were stable. No serious adverse effects were recorded. Conclusions: It was recommended to provide AA to patients with acute postoperative pain. However, a more accurate estimate of the effect requires further rigorously designed large-scale and high-quality RCTs for improving acute postoperative pain after surgery.展开更多
文摘Objective: To identify the effectiveness of auricular acupressure(AA) in patients with acute postoperative pain after surgery by systematic review. Methods: A search of randomized controlled trials was conducted in 5 English medical electronic databases and 4 Chinese databases. Two reviewers independently retrieved related studies, assessed the methodological quality, and extracted data with a standardized data form. Meta-analyses were performed using all time-points meta-analysis. Results: A total of 26 studies with 1,682 participants were included. Results showed that compared with conventional therapy, AA significantly improved the total effective rate [risk ratio=1.25, 95% confidence interval(CI), 1.13 to 1.37, P<0.0001; heterogeneity: P<0.0001, I^2=85%]. In the subgroup analysis, the results changed in different follow-up time and surgery categories. The pain relief in the AA group might be the most significant at 72 h after surgery(mean difference=–0.85, 95% CI, –1.20 to –0.50, P<0.0001) and in abdominal surgery(mean difference=–1.15, 95% CI, –1.41 to –0.90, P<0.0001). Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the results of this meta-analysis were stable. No serious adverse effects were recorded. Conclusions: It was recommended to provide AA to patients with acute postoperative pain. However, a more accurate estimate of the effect requires further rigorously designed large-scale and high-quality RCTs for improving acute postoperative pain after surgery.
