| Title |
Electroacupuncture for abdominal pain relief in patients with acute pancreatitis: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Trials, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13063-018-2644-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dong Kee Jang, Chan Yung Jung, Kyung Ho Kim, Jun Kyu Lee |
| Abstract |
Previous studies have shown that electroacupuncture (EA) reduces the severity of acute pancreatitis. However, the effect of EA for pain relief in patients with acute pancreatitis has not been evaluated yet. The purpose of this study was to prove the efficacy of EA for pain relief in patients with acute pancreatitis compared with conventional treatment. This study is a randomized, controlled, three-arm, parallel-group, multi-center trial. Patients diagnosed with acute pancreatitis are enrolled and randomly assigned to EA 1, EA 2, or a control group in a 1:1:1 ratio. All the enrolled patients basically receive the conventional standard-of-care therapy for acute pancreatitis. Local EA is given in group EA 1, while local with additional distal EA is given in group EA 2. Local EA includes two acupoints, Zhong Wan (CV12) and Shang Wan (CV13), located in the abdomen, while distal EA includes 12 peripheral acupoints, Zhong Wan (CV12), Shang Wan (CV13), He Gu (LI4), Nei Guan (PC6), San Yin Jiao (SP6), Xuan Zhong (GB39), Zu San Li (ST36), and Shang Ju Xu (ST37). The patients randomized to the EA 1 and EA 2 groups undergo one session of EA daily from day 1 until day 4, or until pain resolves. The primary endpoint is the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) change for pain on day 5. Secondary endpoints include daily VAS, requirement of analgesics, changes of inflammatory markers, time to pain disappearance, and hospital days. The results of this trial are expected to prove the efficacy of EA for pain relief in patients with acute pancreatitis. Based upon the results, EA would be applied to a variety of clinical practices for reducing pain. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT03173222 . Registered on 1 August 2017. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| Ireland | 1 | 17% |
| Philippines | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 83% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 26 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 15% |
| Other | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 12% |
| Professor | 1 | 4% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 12 | 46% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 38% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Engineering | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 12 | 46% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 March 2019.
All research outputs
#6,547,732
of 25,988,468 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#775
of 1,868 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,477
of 344,828 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#4
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,988,468 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,868 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 344,828 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.