Description bilaterally in the arm (LI 10), the hand (LI 4), and just below the knee (ST 36) to extend and prolong the effect of EA stimulation. The point GV 20, on the top of the cranium, was chosen to increase relaxation based on an empirical recommendation in traditional Chinese medicine.
Experimental Description
In all, 160 women undergoing IVF were randomized, according to a computer-generated list, to EA or CA.
Sample Count
160
Control
Std
CA group(n=80)
Experiment
EA group(n=80)
Indicator
State-trait anxiety index(STAI)Visual analog scale(VAS)Time and drug consumption
Auxiliary Medication
The study compared EA and a PCB (EA group) with conventional analgesia (i.v. alfentanil) and a PCB (CA group). The CA group was also offered pre-medication (0.5 mg oral flunitrazepam, 1 g rectal paracetamol).
Stimulation Method
EA
Induction Method
Electroacupuncture Instrument Model
Manufacturer
Frequency
Waveform
Strength
Induction Time
CEFAR Acus 4
Cefar, Lund, Sweden
80 Hz(abdomen); 2 Hz(hands); a burst length of 0.1 s; a burst frequency of 80 Hz
square-wave pulses
he high-frequency stimulation intensity induced strong
but non-painful paraesthesia with the aim of influencing the spinal
cord and activating the gate control system; he low-frequency stimulation induced non-painful
local muscle contractions with the aim of releasing b-endorphins
centrally and reducing the sensation of pain.
EA was administered 30–45 min before
oocyte aspiration and terminated directly after retrieval.
Acupuncture_Needle
Needle_Manufacturer
Needle_Depth
0.30×30 mm;0.30×50 mm
Landsbro, Sweden
15-30 mm
Description The stimulation frequency in the abdomen was high, 80 Hz, while the frequency used in the hands was low, 2 Hz, with burst pulses (a burst length of 0.1 s and a burst frequency of 80 Hz).
Anesthesia Method
AAA
Clinical Trial Type
random
Contraindications
Exclusion criteria were earlier partici_x005fpation in the study, epilepsy, a pacemaker, severe nickel allergy, or hepatitis B or C
Effector
Although VAS pain ratings were significantly higher at oocyte aspiration (P<0.0001) and after retrieval (P<0.01) in the EA than in the CA group, they were similar 60?min after surgery. Both groups had similar STAI well-being scores. The EA group was significantly less tired and confused than the CA group after oocyte aspiration. No significant differences in time and costs for drug consumption were noted. CONCLUSION: EA cannot generally be recommended as a pain-relieving method at oocyte aspiration but might be an alternative for women desiring a non-pharmacological method. An advantage of EA is less post-operative tiredness and confusion compared with CA.
Electro-acupuncture versus conventional analgesia: a comparison of pain levels during oocyte aspiration and patients' experiences of well-being after surgery.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The primary aims were to compare the pain-relieving effect and post-operative well-being between electro-acupuncture analgesia (EA) and conventional analgesia (CA) comprising opiates. Further aims were to compare time for mobilization, and costs for time and drug consumption. METHODS: In all, 160 women undergoing IVF were randomized, according to a computer-generated list, to EA or CA. Well-being was evaluated with the State Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). Pain and subjective expectations and experiences were recorded on a visual analogue scale (VAS). Time and drug consumption were recorded. RESULTS: Although VAS pain ratings were significantly higher at oocyte aspiration (P < 0.0001) and after retrieval (P < 0.01) in the EA than in the CA group, they were similar 60 min after surgery. Both groups had similar STAI well-being scores. The EA group was significantly less tired and confused than the CA group after oocyte aspiration. No significant differences in time and costs for drug consumption were noted. CONCLUSION: EA cannot generally be recommended as a pain-relieving method at oocyte aspiration but might be an alternative for women desiring a non-pharmacological method. An advantage of EA is less post-operative tiredness and confusion compared with CA."
Souce
Hum Reprod. 2005 Mar;20(3):728-35. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deh665. Epub 2004 Dec 17.
