Acupuncture for dysmenorrhoea

Smith CA, Armour M, Zhu X, Li X, Lu ZY, Song J · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2016 April 18

Objective

To determine the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture and acupressure in the treatment of primary dysmenorrhoea when compared with a placebo, no treatment, or conventional medical treatment

Conclusions

There is insufficient evidence to demonstrate whether or not acupuncture or acupressure are effective in treating primary dysmenorrhoea, and for most comparisons no data were available on adverse events. The quality of the evidence was low or very low for all comparisons. The main limitations were risk of bias, poor reporting, inconsistency and risk of publication bias

Critical Appraisal

Published research can offer valuable insights, but a paper’s conclusions may go beyond what its results support. Critical appraisal examines the methods, findings and limitations to clarify what can reasonably be concluded—and what remains uncertain.

This article has not yet been critically appraised by the Research Hub.

Learn more about Critical Appraisal

Insights

The review found limited consistent evidence supporting the effectiveness of acupuncture for relieving menstrual pain compared to sham treatments or other interventions.

This passage provides a summary of the main results of a review on the effectiveness of acupuncture and acupressure in managing primary dysmenorrhoea (menstrual pain) in women. The review includes 42 trials involving 4640 women. The primary outcome, which is pain relief, showed no consistent difference between women receiving acupuncture and those receiving a sham control (simulated treatment). However, limited evidence suggested a benefit for acupuncture compared to NSAIDs, Chinese herbs, and other treatments. Acupressure had limited evidence of benefit compared to a sham control. Secondary outcomes, including menstrual symptoms and quality of life, did not consistently show a benefit from acupuncture. The trials had various limitations, such as incomplete reporting of outcomes, short follow-up periods, and variations in eligibility criteria. The quality of reporting was generally poor, and many trials were at high risk of bias. The overall quality of evidence for pain relief and menstrual symptoms was considered low. Other reviews on this topic found promising evidence for acupuncture, but results were influenced by methodological flaws in the trials.