Reporting quality and effect size comparison in randomized controlled trials of bo's abdominal acupuncture using CONSORT statement and STRICTA

ObjectiveTo evaluate the reporting quality of randomized controlled trials (RCT) that compared Bo's abdominal acupuncture with conventional body acupuncture, and compare the efficacy and safety between them by performing a Meta-analysis.MethodsAll RCTs comparing Bo's abdominal acupuncture with conventional body acupuncture were included. English and Chinese databases were searched from their respective inceptions to March 2014. The reporting quality was assessed according to the “Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials” (CONSORT) checklist for parallel RCTs and the revised “Standards for Reporting Interventions in Clinical Trials of Acupuncture” (STRICTA). A Meta-analysis was conducted to synthesize the effect sizes, and publication bias was evaluated by the Egger linear regression test using Stata.ResultsNinety-seven studies were included, of which most lacked adequate reporting information, and 80.4% showed that the efficacy of abdominal acupuncture is superior to conventional body acupuncture, especially for the following diseases: lumbar disc herniation, cervical spondylosis, omarthritis and cervical vertigo, except simple obesity. Effect-sizes were controversial when evaluating different outcomes.ConclusionThe international standard CONSORT statement and STRICTA guidelines should be strictly applied when reporting acupuncture RCTs in the future. Abdominal acupuncture appears to be more effective compared with conventional body acupuncture for some diseases. However, further high quality blind RCTs using validated outcome indexes and standard reporting are warranted.