↓ Skip to main content

Using auriculotherapy for osteoarthritic knee among elders: a double-blinded randomised feasibility study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
82 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Using auriculotherapy for osteoarthritic knee among elders: a double-blinded randomised feasibility study
Published in
BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12906-016-1242-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lorna K. P. Suen, Chao Hsing Yeh, Simon K. W. Yeung

Abstract

Osteoarthritic knee (OA knee) is a common condition in the elderly. Exploration of non-invasive complementary therapies for OA knee is warranted given the limitations of pharmacologic therapies. Auriculotherapy (AT) is a therapeutic method in which specific points on the auricle are stimulated to treat various disorders of the body, and the therapeutic value and synergistic effect of laser auriculotherapy (LAT) when combined with magneto-auriculotherapy (MAT) merits further investigation. This study adopted a double-blinded four-arm randomized placebo design. The aims of study are (1) to assess the feasibility of AT among elders with OA knee in a future large-scale study, including the use of blinding in subjects and evaluators, acceptance of treatment protocol, and estimating the effect size and attrition rate; and (2) to evaluate the preliminary effect of AT in elders with OA knee. Subjects were randomly divided into four groups with different modes of AT with/without placebo objects. A total of 43 subjects completed the 6-week intervention and post-assessment. Assessments included a numerical rating scale of pain (NRS), the timed-up-and-go test (TUGT), and standard goniometer measurements during knee flexion and extension, Kruskal-Wallis test was used to evaluate differences among groups, and Wilcoxon sign-ranked test for examining within-group comparison. Preliminary results indicated the absence of differences in the NRS, TUGT, and active/passive knee flexion and extension at baseline, as well as post-therapy, between the four groups. Even though the differences of these parameters between groups were not significant, the relative differences of NRS and TUGT in subjects who received combined MAT plus LAT were higher than those treated with MAT or LAT alone, or the placebo group. Four of the six parameters demonstrated significant within group differences in subjects who received MAT and/or LAT, whereas no significant differences were found in the placebo group. This study demonstrates that the AT protocol adopted in this study for elders with OA knee is feasible and could be applied in future larger-scale study. Larger sample size should be considered in a future trial to determine the causal relationship between treatment and effect. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02352636 . Registered on 23 January 2015.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 81 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Student > Postgraduate 7 9%
Researcher 6 7%
Student > Bachelor 5 6%
Other 13 16%
Unknown 31 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 20%
Social Sciences 5 6%
Psychology 3 4%
Neuroscience 3 4%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 30 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 August 2022.
All research outputs
#14,392,194
of 23,049,027 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#1,697
of 3,647 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#215,926
of 366,274 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#46
of 109 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,049,027 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,647 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 366,274 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 109 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.