Search

Additional file 1: Supplemental file 1. Suggested risk of bias criteria for EPOC reviews.

Additional file 2. Searching Strategies.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of Acupuncture-point stimulation (APS) in postoperative pain control compared with sham/placebo acupuncture or standard treatments (usual care or no treatment). Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Meta-analysis results indicated that APS interventions improved VAS scores significantly and also reduced total morphine consumption. No serious APS-related adverse effects (AEs) were reported. There is Level I evidence for the effectiveness of body points plaster therapy and Level II evidence for body points electroacupuncture (EA), body points acupressure, body points APS for abdominal surgery patients, auricular points seed embedding, manual auricular acupuncture, and auricular EA. We obtained Level III evidence for body points APS in patients who underwent cardiac surgery and cesarean section and for auricular-point stimulation in patients who underwent abdominal surgery. There is insufficient evidence to conclude that APS is an effective postoperative pain therapy in surgical patients, although the evidence does support the conclusion that APS can reduce analgesic requirements without AEs. The best level of evidence was not adequate in most subgroups. Some limitations of this study may have affected the results, possibly leading to an overestimation of APS effects.

Auricular therapy (AT) has been historically viewed as a convenient approach adjunct to pharmacological therapy for cancer patients with chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). The aim of this study was to assess the evidence of the therapeutic effect of AT for CINV management in cancer patients. Relevant randomized controlled trials were retrieved from 12 electronic databases without language restrictions. Meanwhile, manual search was conducted for Chinese journals on complementary medicine published within the last five years, and the reference lists of included studies were also checked to identify any possible eligible studies. Twenty-one studies with 1713 participants were included. The effect rate of AT for managing acute CINV ranged from 44.44% to 93.33% in the intervention groups and 15% to 91.67% in the control groups. For delayed CINV, it was 62.96% to 100% and 25% to 100%, respectively. AT seems to be a promising approach in managing CINV. However, the level of evidence was low and the definite effect cannot be concluded as there were significant methodological flaws identified in the analyzed studies. The implications drawn from the 21 studies put some clues for future practice in this area including the need to conduct more rigorously designed randomized controlled trials.

The aim of this study was to systematically evaluate the literature on adverse events associated with auricular therapy (AT). Case reports, case series, surveys, and all types of clinical trials reporting adverse events of AT were included. Relevant articles were mainly retrieved from 13 electronic databases and seven Chinese journals on complementary medicine. AT-related adverse events were reported in 32 randomized controlled trials, five uncontrolled clinical trials, four case reports, and two controlled clinical trials. For auricular acupuncture, the most frequently reported adverse events were tenderness or pain at insertion, dizziness, local discomfort, minor bleeding and nausea, and so forth. For auricular acupressure, local skin irritation and discomfort, mild tenderness or pain, and dizziness were commonly reported. Skin irritation, local discomfort, and pain were detected in auricular electroacupuncture, and minor infection was identified in auricular bloodletting therapy. Most of these events were transient, mild, and tolerable, and no serious adverse events were identified. Our findings provide preliminary evidence that AT is a relatively safe approach. Considering the patient’s safety, prospective or retrospective surveys are needed in future research to gather practitioner-reported and patient-reported adverse events on AT, and the quality of adverse events reporting in future AT trials should be improved.

Background Theoretically, behavioural activation may have a valuable role to play in the treatment of depression among young people with emerging/early psychosis, however we lack trial evidence concerning its acceptability and feasibility. This study will establish the feasibility of clinician-delivered behavioural activation as an adjunct to standard care for this population. We aim to train and support clinicians in delivering behavioural activation to improve depressive symptoms in young people with early/emerging psychosis. Our objectives are to: Establish the number of young people with early/emerging psychosis with clinically meaningful depression symptoms. Establish the proportion of clinicians that complete the behavioural activation training and are deemed to be competent. Determine the proportion of eligible participants approached who agree to consent to the research. Determine the proportion of participants that complete baseline measures, complete behavioural activation treatment (attending for at least fifteen minutes in a minimum of eight sessions), and complete follow-up measures (immediately post-intervention and at 3 months follow-up). Establish clinicians’ fidelity to treatment (by recording randomly selected treatment sessions and completing a fidelity checklist). Calculate preliminary efficacy of behavioural activation against primary and secondary outcomes. Explore participants’ experiences of facilitating behavioural activation (clinicians) and receiving behavioural activation (young people with emerging/early psychosis). Method This is a pilot controlled clinical trial with a two-arm parallel-group study. Approximately 60 young people with emerging/early psychosis will be randomly allocated to either behavioural activation treatment plus standard care or standard care alone. The primary outcome: depressive symptoms; and secondary outcomes: negative symptoms, overall psychiatric symptoms, medication side effects and functioning, will be assessed at baseline, post-intervention and at 3-months follow-up. The protocol is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (reference number: ACTRN12622000756729). Discussion The findings will inform the design of a full-scale randomised controlled trial.