A Cochrane review compared acupuncture to sham acupuncture for overactive bladder and suggested an uncertain impact on urinary incontinence episodes (MD 0.55, 95 % CI -1.51 to 2.60). The same review compared acupuncture to medications and suggested an increase in cure or improvement rates (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.43). Adverse events were rare «Hargreaves E, Baker K, Barry G, et al. Acupuncture...»1.
A systematic review and meta-analysis compared acupuncture to rehabilitation training or medication and suggested reduced urinary incontinence measured by the pad test (SMD = -2.67, 95% CI -4.05 to -1.29), and ICIQ-SF scores (MD = -3.46, 95% CI -3.69 to-3.22) «Yang N, Ge X, Ye J, et al. Efficacy of acupuncture...»2.
The level of evidence was downgraded due to imprecision and inconsistency.
| Reference | Study type | Population | Intervention and comparison | Outcomes | Risk of bias |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RCT=randomized controlled trial; SR=systematic review; MA=meta-analysis; ICIQ-SF= International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire Short Form; | |||||
| «Hargreaves E, Baker K, Barry G, et al. Acupuncture...»1 | SR/MA | Adults with overactive bladder symptoms | Acupuncture vs Sham Acupuncture or Medication | Incontinence episodes; Cure or improvement in urinary symptoms |
Low |
| «Yang N, Ge X, Ye J, et al. Efficacy of acupuncture...»2 | SR/MA | Women >40 age | Acupuncture vs Rehabilitation or Medication |
Pad test; ICIQ-SF |
High |
| Reference | Comments |
|---|---|
| «Hargreaves E, Baker K, Barry G, et al. Acupuncture...»1, «Yang N, Ge X, Ye J, et al. Efficacy of acupuncture...»2 | Sources of bias include the heterogeneity in acupuncture methods utilized across the studies and the lack of clear reporting on group blinding in some studies. |
Results
| Reference | Number of studies and number of patients (n; I/C) | Follow-up time | Mean (sd) I | Mean (sd) C | Mean difference (Fixed, 95 % CI) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Level of evidence: moderate The quality of evidence is downgraded due to imprecision and inconsistency. |
|||||
| «Hargreaves E, Baker K, Barry G, et al. Acupuncture...»1 | 2 (n=121; 60/61) | 2-3 months | - | - | 0.55 (-1.51, 2.60) |
| Reference | Number of studies and number of patients (n; I/C) | Follow-up time | Mean (sd) I | Mean (sd) C | Risk Ratio (Fixed, 95% CI) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Level of evidence: low The quality of evidence is downgraded due to imprecision and inconsistency. |
|||||
| «Hargreaves E, Baker K, Barry G, et al. Acupuncture...»1 | 5 (n=258; 130/128) | 1-2 months | - | - | 1.25 (1.10, 1.43), favors acupuncture |
| Reference | Number of studies and number of patients (n;I/C) | Follow-up time | Mean (sd) I | Mean (sd) C | Std. Mean Difference (Random 95% CI) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Level of evidence: low The quality of evidence is downgraded due to imprecision and inconsistency. I=intervention; C=comparison; CI=confidence interval |
|||||
| «Yang N, Ge X, Ye J, et al. Efficacy of acupuncture...»2 | 5 (n= 417; 210/207) | - | - | - | -2.67 (-4.05, -1.29) |
| Reference | Number of studies and number of patients (n; I/C) | Follow-up time | Absolute number of events (%) I | Absolute number of events (%) C | Mean difference (Fixed 95% CI) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Level of evidence: low The quality of evidence is downgraded due to imprecision and inconsistency. I=intervention; C=comparison; CI=confidence interval |
|||||
| «Yang N, Ge X, Ye J, et al. Efficacy of acupuncture...»2 | 4 (n=366; 183/183) | - | - | - | -3.46 (-3.69, -3.22) |