Effectiveness of Acupuncture for Pain Control After Cesarean Delivery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: A pharmacological approach to pain control after cesarean delivery is often insufficient on its own. Acupuncture is a promising method for mitigating postoperative pain and reducing postoperative opioid requirements. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and effectiveness of acupuncture as an adjunctive therapy for pain control after cesarean delivery, compared with a placebo intervention and standard care alone. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This single-center, placebo-controlled, patient- and assessor-blinded randomized clinical trial was conducted from January 13, 2015, to June 27, 2018, at a tertiary university hospital in Greifswald, Germany. Participants were women who were scheduled for elective cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia and were randomized to either the acupuncture group (n = 60) or placebo group (n = 60). Another 60 consecutive patients who met the eligibility criteria and received the standard postoperative analgesia were selected to form a nonrandomized standard care group. The intention-to-treat analysis was performed from August 19, 2019, to September 13, 2019. INTERVENTIONS: In addition to standard pain treatment, each patient in the acupuncture group received auricular and body acupuncture with indwelling intradermal needles, whereas patients in the placebo group were treated with nonpenetrating placebo needles. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was pain intensity on movement, which was measured using an 11-item verbal rating scale. Secondary outcomes were analgesia-related adverse effects, analgesics consumption, time to mobilization and Foley catheter removal, quality of patient blinding to randomization, and patient satisfaction with treatment of pain. RESULTS: A total of 180 female patients (mean [SD] age, 31 [5] years) were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. The mean pain intensity on movement in the acupuncture group on the first postoperative day was lower than in the placebo group (4.7 [1.8] vs 6.0 [2.0] points; Cohen d, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.31-1.01; P = .001) and the standard care group (6.3 [1.3] points; Cohen d, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.63-1.40; P < .001). On the first postoperative day, 59 patients (98%) in the acupuncture group were fully mobilized vs 49 patients (83%) in the placebo group (relative risk [RR], 1.18; 95% CI, 1.06-1.33; P = .01) and 35 patients (58%) in the standard care group (RR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.36-2.09; P < .001). The Foley catheter was removed in a total of 57 patients (93%) from the acupuncture group vs 43 patients (72%) from the placebo group (RR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.12-1.57; P = .003) and 42 patients (70%) from the standard care group (RR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.14-1.62; P = .002). Other parameters were comparable across the 3 study groups. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Results of this trial showed that acupuncture was safe and effective in reducing pain and accelerating mobilization of patients after cesarean delivery. With consideration for personnel and time expenditures, acupuncture can be recommended as routine, supplemental therapy for pain control in patients after elective cesarean delivery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02364167.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".