Sixty patients requiring gastroscopy were randomly assigned to the EA and control groups (sham acupuncture, SA, group) in a 1:1 ratio. Patients in the EA group underwent treatment at acupoints LI4 (Hegu), PC6 (Neiguan), ST36 (Zusanli), and ST34 (Liangqiu) for 30 min before gastroscopy, whereas patients in the SA group underwent super cial acupuncture at non-acupoints.
Sample Count
60
Age
18-70
Control
Sham
sham acupuncture group(n=30)
Experiment
electroacupuncture group(n=30)
Indicator
Visual analog scale(VAS)Amsterdam Preoperative Anxiety and Information Inventory Scale(APAIS)STAI-S6Heart rate(HR)Blood pressure(BP)Pulse oximetryBlinding assessment
Stimulation Method
EA
Induction Method
Electroacupuncture Instrument Model
Manufacturer
Frequency
Waveform
Strength
Induction Time
G6805-2B
Shanghai Huayi Medical Instrument Co., LTD, China
2 Hz
continuous wave
2 mA
30 min
Acupuncture_Needle
Needle_Manufacturer
Needle_Depth
0.25×25 mm;0.25×40 mm
Wuxi Jiajian Medical Device Co., LTD, China
-
Description Disposable sterile stainless-steel needles (0.25 × 25 mm and 0.25 × 40 mm; Wuxi Jiajian Medical Device Co., LTD, China) were used for treatment. After inserting the needles, the acupuncturists performed lifting-thrusting or twirling manipulation to achieve the Deqi sensation. Two pairs of electrodes from the EA appa- ratus (Type G6805–2B, Shanghai Huayi Medical Instrument Co., LTD, China) were connected to the needles at bilateral LI4 and ST36, deliv- ering a continuous wave at a low frequency (2 Hz) and a current of 2 mA. The treatment session lasted 30 min
Anesthesia Method
AA
Clinical Trial Type
a single-centre, patient-assessor blind, randomised controlled trial
Adverse Effects
AEs occurred in seven cases: four patients in the EA group (subcutaneous haematoma in three patients and local pain in one patient after EA treatment) and three patients in the SA group (dizziness in one patient during the intervention period and local pain in two patients after the intervention). All AEs were mild and relieved after symptomatic treatment. There was no statistical difference in the frequency of AEs between the two groups (P = 0.689 >0.05).
Contraindications
Patients with local skin infections, allergies, or diseases around the acupoints
Effector
At 30 min after gastroscopy, the mean VAS score in the EA group (4.20 ± 0.63) was lower than that in the control group (5.14 ± 0.70, mean difference (MD): −0.94, 95% con dence interval (CI): −1.28,−0.59, P < 0.001). There were statistically signi cant between-group differences in the nausea and vomiting, throat discomfort and agitation VAS scores (all P < 0.01), whereas no difference was found in the bucking VAS score (P = 0.692). Compared with the SA group, patients in the EA group had a 6.90-point lower in STAI-S6 (95% CI:−12.98, −0.81, P = 0.027) after gastroscopy. Patients in the EA group had a slower heart rate and lower blood pressure than those in the SA group. Serious adverse events were not observed during the trial. EA can help relieve patients’ anxiety, and improve their nausea and vomiting, throat discomfort, and agitation during gastroscopy.
Effect of electroacupuncture on discomfort during gastroscopy: A randomised controlled trial.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal reactions, pain and discomfort are inevitable in patients undergoing common gastroscopy. Acupuncture is an effective therapy that assists in the perioperative period; however, evidence of it relieving discomfort is limited. We conducted this trial to observe the effect of electroacupuncture (EA) on discomfort caused by gastroscopy without sedatives. METHODS: This was a single-centre, patient-assessor blind, randomised controlled trial. Sixty patients requiring gastroscopy were randomly assigned to the EA and control groups (sham acupuncture, SA, group) in a 1:1 ratio. Patients in the EA group underwent treatment at acupoints LI4 (Hegu), PC6 (Neiguan), ST36 (Zusanli), and ST34 (Liangqiu) for 30 min before gastroscopy, whereas patients in the SA group underwent superficial acupuncture at non-acupoints. The patients' nausea level, throat discomfort, bucking, and agitation were evaluated using a visual analogue scale (VAS) within 30 min after gastroscopy. The mean VAS score was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were the Amsterdam Preoperative Anxiety and Information Inventory Scale, used to evaluate patients' preoperative anxiety levels, and the 6-item State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-S6), used to assess anxiety before and after gastroscopy. The patients' vital signs, including heart rate, blood pressure, and pulse oxygen saturation, were recorded before, during, and after gastroscopy. RESULTS: At 30 min after gastroscopy, the mean VAS score in the EA group (4.20 +/- 0.63) was lower than that in the control group (5.14 +/- 0.70, mean difference (MD): - 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI): - 1.28, - 0.59, P < 0.001). There were statistically significant between-group differences in the nausea and vomiting, throat discomfort and agitation VAS scores (all P < 0.01), whereas no difference was found in the bucking VAS score (P = 0.692). Compared with the SA group, patients in the EA group had a 6.90-point lower in STAI-S6 (95% CI: -12.98, -0.81, P = 0.027) after gastroscopy. Patients in the EA group had a slower heart rate and lower blood pressure than those in the SA group. Serious adverse events were not observed during the trial. CONCLUSION: EA can help relieve patients' anxiety, and improve their nausea and vomiting, throat discomfort, and agitation during gastroscopy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR) ID: ChiCTR2000040726."
