↓ Skip to main content

Electroacupuncture inhibits chronification of the acute pain of knee osteoarthritis: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
101 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
Electroacupuncture inhibits chronification of the acute pain of knee osteoarthritis: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Published in
Trials, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13063-015-0636-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lin-lin Shen, Guo-fu Huang, Wen Tian, Ling-ling Yu, Xiao-cui Yuan, Zhao-qing Zhang, Jing Yin, Chao-yang Ma, Guo-wei Cai, Jian-wu Li, Ming-qiao Ding, Wei He, Xin-yan Gao, Bing Zhu, Xiang-hong Jing, Man Li

Abstract

Previous studies have shown that electroacupuncture (EA) has a significant effect on acute pain, but it has not solved the clinical problem of the chronification of acute pain. Diffuse noxious inhibitory controls (DNIC) function as a reliable indicator to predict the risk of chronic pain events. DNIC function in knee osteoarthritis (KOA) patients has been demonstrated to gradually decrease during the development of chronic pain. The purpose of this study is to conduct a randomized, controlled clinical trial to determine if EA can repair impaired DNIC function and thus prevent chronification of the acute pain of KOA. This is a multicenter, single blind, randomized, controlled, three-arm, large-scale clinical trial. A total of 450 KOA patients will be randomly assigned to three groups. The strong EA group will receive EA with high-intensity current (2 mA < current < 5 mA) at the ipsilateral 'Neixiyan' (EX-LE5), 'Dubi'(ST35), 'Liangqiu'(ST34) and 'Xuehai' (SP10). The weak EA group will receive EA with low-intensity current (0 mA < current < 0.5 mA) on the same acupoints. The sham EA group will receive EA with low-intensity current (0 mA < current < 0.5 mA) with fine needles inserted superficially into the sites 2 cm lateral to the above acupoints. The patients will be treated with EA once a day, 30 minutes per session, in 5 sessions perweek, for 2 weeks. In order to determine the best stage of KOA for effective EA intervention, patients within the treatment groups also will be divided into four stages. The primary outcomes are Visual Analog Scale (VAS), DNIC function and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). Clinical assessments will be evaluated at baseline (before treatment) and after 5 to 10 sessions of treatment. This trial will be helpful in identifying whether strong EA is more effective than weak EA in reversing chronification of acute pain through repairing the impaired DNIC function and in screening for the best stage of KOA for effective EA intervention. Chinese Clinical Trial Registry Number: ChiCTR-ICR-14005411 . The date of registration is 31 October 2014.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Ukraine 1 <1%
Unknown 98 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 21%
Student > Bachelor 14 14%
Researcher 11 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 8%
Student > Postgraduate 6 6%
Other 18 18%
Unknown 23 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 22%
Neuroscience 4 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 2%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 26 26%

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 09 June 2016.
All research outputs
#3,991,935
of 8,607,055 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#1,290
of 2,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,017
of 229,439 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#59
of 103 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,607,055 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 52nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,345 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 229,439 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 103 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.