Pain Research and Management

Research Article

Quality of Evidence Supporting the Role of Acupuncture for the Treatment of Irritable Bowel Syndrome

Table 4

Certainty of evidence quality.
StudiesTreatmentsOutcomesLimitationsInconsistencyIndirectnessImprecisionPublication biasRelative effect (95% CI)Quality
Guo et al. [19]AT versus CMWeekly defecation−10000SMD, −0.29 (−0.49, −0.08)M
IBS symptom scores−10000SMD, −1.17 (−1.42, −0.93)M
IBS-QOL−100−10SMD 2.37 (1.94, 2.80)L
IBS-SSS−10000SMD −0.75 (−1.04, −0.47)M
Effective rate−10000RR 1.25 (1.18, 1.32)M
Recurrence rate−100−10RR 0.43 (0.28, 0.66)L
Adverse effects−100−10RR 0.59 (0.12, 2.90)L
Zheng et al. [20]AT versus Sham ATEffective rate−10000RR 1.22 (1.01, 1.47)M
IBS-QOL−10000SMD −0.10 (−0.31, 0.11)M
AT versus CMEffective rate−10000RR 1.17 (1.12, 1.23)M
IBS symptom scores−1−1000SMD −1.16 (−1.61, −0.71)L
IBS-QOL−100−10SMD 0.75 (0.34, 1.16)L
Yan et al. [21]AT + CHM versus CMEffective rate−10000RR 1.29 (1.24, 1.35)M
Abdominal pain−1−1000SMD −0.45 (−0.72, −0.17)L
Chao and Zhang [22]AT versus CMEffective rate−10000RR 1.75 (1.24, 2.46)M
Manheimer et al. [23]AT versus Sham ATIBS-SSS−100−10SMD −0.11 (−0.35, 0.13)L
IBS-QOL−100−10SMD −0.03 (−0.27, 0.22)L
AT versus CMEffective rate−10000RR 1.28 (1.12, 1.45)M
Fu and Jiang [24]AT versus CMEffective rate−10000RR 1.20 (1.15, 1.25)M
Deng et al. [25]AT versus CMEffective rate−10000OR 3.92 (2.83, 5.43)M
Recurrence rate−100−10OR 0.22 (0.12, 0.41)L
Li et al. [26]AT versus CMRecurrence rate−100−1−1RR 0.49 (0.35, 0.68)CL
Effective rate−1000−1RR 1.17 (1.08, 1.26)L
Pei et al. [27]AT versus CMEffective rate−1−1000RR 1.27 (1.09, 1.49)L
Zhao [28]AT versus CMEffective rate−1000−1RR 1.28 (1.20, 1.38)L