Meta Analysis on Randomized Controlled Trial for Thermal Acupuncture Treatment of Osteoarthritis in Knee

Objective: Systematic evaluation of the effectiveness of thermoacupuncture and mere acupuncture or electroacupuncture in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KEA). Method: Retrieval of Chinese Journal Full Text Database, Wip Chinese Science and Technology Journal Database, PubMed, Embase, obtained from Koku to June 2018 Pure needling or electric needle treatment KOA's RCT literature; screening trials, extracting information and conducting methodological quality evaluation based on the requirements of the Cochrane Evaluation Manual 5.0.2; selection of total effective, subjective knee pain (VAS score), WOMAC total time of relief (pain, stiffness and average cure), Lequesne Knee OA severity index ( ISOA) as an evaluation indicator for Meta analysis; Meta analysis using State 12.0 software to test heterogeneity and select the corresponding effect model analysis, applying Begg's rank correlation test and Egger's linear regression method to test the bibliography bias; Counting and measuring data use RR values, SMCI and 95% respectively Result: ① Included in total 12 literature, all RCT literature, including 6 studies on the efficacy of warm acupuncture and acupuncture alone, and 6 studies on the efficacy of warm acupuncture and electroacupuncture treatment KOA; All studies are from China and contain a total of 1176 study subjects. No statistical differences, RR=1.04 (95% CI: 1.00—1.08), Funnel Figure Begg's test P=0.086, Egger's test P=0.296. In terms of VAS score after treatment, according to a sub-group analysis of interventions, the results showed: the difference between VAS score after treatment and needling ratio alone, SMD=-1.57 (95% CI ፦1.83 to -1.80); with electric needles No statistically significant difference between group 2, SMD=0.32 (95% CI ፦0.11 to 0.76). The difference between WOMAC in the temperature acupuncture group and electroacupuncture group after treatment was not statistically significant, SMD=0.08 (95% CI ፦0.15 to 0.32). The differences are statistically important, SMD and 95% CI were 0.69 (95% CI: 0.46 to 0.92), -0.60 (95% CI ፦0.82 to -0.37); differences in average cure time of 2 groups were not statistically significant, SMD=-0.04 (95% CI ፦0.27 to 0.18). It's statistically significant. , SMD=-1.68 (95% CI ፦2.03 to -1.32). Conclusion: Temperature acupuncture improves subjective pain and reduces Lequesne knee OA severity index, but in total efficacy, both are comparable. Stiffness, but in total efficiency, relief of subjective pain , lower WOMAC total score and average cure time, there is no significant difference in pain relief time, temperature acupuncture does not and electroacupuncture. Given the low quality of the literature and the statistical heterogeneity between studies, high quality RCT is needed to validate the above conclusions.