Cargando…

The Use of Wet Cupping for Persistent Nonspecific Low Back Pain: Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of wet cupping therapy as a single treatment for persistent nonspecific low back pain (PNSLBP). Design: Randomized controlled trial comparing wet cupping versus no treatment in PNSLBP. Setting: Outpatient clinic in three secondary care hospitals i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: AlBedah, Abdullah, Khalil, Mohamed, Elolemy, Ahmed, Hussein, Asim A., AlQaed, Meshari, Al Mudaiheem, Abdullah, Abutalib, Raid A., Bazaid, Faisal Mohamed, Bafail, Ahmad Saeed, Essa, AboBakr, Bakrain, Mohammed Yahia
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4522952/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26069973
http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/acm.2015.0065
Descripción
Sumario:Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of wet cupping therapy as a single treatment for persistent nonspecific low back pain (PNSLBP). Design: Randomized controlled trial comparing wet cupping versus no treatment in PNSLBP. Setting: Outpatient clinic in three secondary care hospitals in Saudi Arabia. Patients: Eighty eligible participants with PNSLBP for at least 3 months were randomly allocated to an intervention group (n=40) or to a control group (n=40). Interventions: Six wet cupping sessions within 2 weeks, each of which were done at two bladder meridian (BL) acupuncture points among BL23, BL24, and BL25. Only acetaminophen was allowed as a rescue treatment in both groups. Outcome measures: The Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), McGill Present Pain Intensity (PPI), and Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODQ) were used as outcome measures. Numbers of acetaminophen tablets taken were compared at 4 weeks from baseline. Adverse events were recorded. Results: At the end of the intervention, statistically significant differences in the three outcome measures favoring the wet cupping group compared with the control group were seen: NRS score, 29.2 (95% confidence interval [CI], 24.6–33.8) versus 57.9 (95% CI, 53.3–62.6), respectively; PPI score, 1.17 (95% CI, 0.96–1.4) versus 2.3 (95% CI, 2.1– 2.7); and ODQ score, 19.6 (95% CI, 16.5–22.7) versus 35.4 (95% CI, 32.3–38.5) (p=0.0001). This improvement continued for another 2 weeks after the end of the intervention. Acetaminophen was used less in the wet cupping group, but this difference was not statistically significant. No adverse events were reported. Conclusions: Wet cupping is potentially effective in reducing pain and improving disability associated with PNSLBP at least for 2 weeks after the end of the wet cupping period. Placebo-controlled trials are needed.