{Reference Type}: Journal Article
{Title}: Effect of thumbtack needle on functional constipation: A pragmatic randomized controlled trial.
{Author}: Dan L;Guilin Z;Linxue Z;Yao T;Li W;Ying X;Jinkui C;Wenqian Z;Guanchao Z;Hang L;Dehua L;
{Journal}: Complement Ther Med
{Volume}: 84
{Issue}: 0
{Year}: 2024 Sep 10
{Factor}: 3.335
{DOI}: 10.1016/j.ctim.2024.103069
{Abstract}: <B>OBJECTIVE: </B>Thumbtack Needling (TN) has been employed in the treatment of functional constipation (FC), although the existing evidence supporting its effectiveness is limited. This study is to evaluate the efficacy of TN in ameliorating FC.<BR><B>METHODS: </B>A total of 482 eligible patients were recruited and randomly assigned to the TN group or the Mosapride Citrate (MC) group. The TN was buried once for three days, rest for one day after two consecutive burials, followed by a 4-week follow-up. The primary outcome measure was the score for Complete and spontaneous bowel movement score (CSBMs). Secondary outcome measures included the Bristol Stool Form Scale (BSFS), Cleveland Clinic Score (CCS), and the Patient Assessment of Constipation Quality of Life Questionnaire (PAC-QOL).<BR><B>RESULTS: </B>Out of the 482 patients randomized, 241 were allocated to each group. Of these, 216 patients (89.6 %) in both groups completed the intervention and follow-up. Compared with the baseline, the differences of CSBMs in TN group [1.76(95 % CI, 1.61 to 1.91)] and MC group [1.35(95 % CI, 1.20 to 1.50)] at week 4 meet the threshold for minimal clinically important difference (MCID). However, there were no clinical difference from baseline at week 2 and week 8 in both groups. Mean CSBMs at week 4 was 3.35 ± 0.99 in the TN group and 3 ± 1.03 in the MC group (adjusted difference between groups, 0.37 points [95 % CI, 0.18 to 0.55]; P < 0.001), although differences between the two groups did not meet the MCID threshold.<BR><B>CONCLUSIONS: </B>Compared with mosapride citrate, thumbtack needling produced a greater improvement in CSBMs, although the difference from control was not clinically significant.<BR><B>RESULTS: </B><BR><B>UNASSIGNED: </B>ChiCTR2100043684.