↓ Skip to main content

Randomized trial of acupoints herbal patching in Sanfu Days for asthma in clinical remission stage

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical and Translational Medicine, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 Mendeley
Title
Randomized trial of acupoints herbal patching in Sanfu Days for asthma in clinical remission stage
Published in
Clinical and Translational Medicine, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40169-016-0084-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Libing Zhu, Wei Zhang, Vivian Wong, Ziea Eric, Lixing Lao, Kwaiching Lo, Waichung Chan, To Yau, Lei Li

Abstract

Although China has a long history of using acupoints herbal patching (acupoints herbal patching means applying herbal patch on special acupoints to stimulate skin to form blisters, hyperemia, and even suppuration) in Sanfu Days (Sanfu Days are supposed to be the three hottest days in a year which is calculated by the ancient calendar) for the treatment of asthma, there is insufficient evidence to support its effectiveness and safety issues. This study investigated the efficacy and safety of acupoints herbal patching compared with placebo in participants with asthma in clinical remission stage. We enrolled participants with asthma in clinical remission stage, above 13 years old and both genders in a randomized, double-blind and placebo-control trial at clinical center, School of Chinese Medicine, The University of Hong Kong to assess the effectiveness and safety of acupoints herbal patching, as compared with placebo, when added to guidelines-based therapy. The trial was conducted for three times (these three times were 19 July, 29 July and 8 August 2010), and the primary outcome was pulmonary function test. Secondary outcome was self-made questionnaire which were designed based on Traditional Chinese Medicine theory and clinical experience summary. Three hundred and twenty three eligible participants were enrolled, they were randomly assigned to acupoints herbal patching group (n = 165), placebo control group (n = 158). There was no significant difference in primary and secondary outcome as compared with placebo group at the end of 3rd treatment and four times follow ups. But sub-analysis of secondary outcome in four times follow ups showed that acupoints herbal patching significantly reduced the proportion of participants who didn't need medical treatment when they had a small rise in asthma-related symptoms increased from 6-15 % at 1st follow up and 0-7 % at 3rd follow up (P < 0.05). It indicated that the proportion of participants who can spontaneous resolution of an asthma attack increased through acupoints herbal patching. In addition, acupoints herbal patching was significantly superior to placebo in reducing the percentage of participants who were susceptibly waken up by asthma symptoms from 27-14 %, and the percentage of participants who had the symptom of running nose and sneezing before onset from 18-8 % at 2nd follow up (P < 0.05). Improvements also occurred with treatment group, it reduced the proportion of participants who were spontaneous sweating at 3rd follow up (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference between acupoints herbal patching and placebo in pulmonary function test in this study. Self-made questionnaire showed that the lasting effect of acupoints herbal patching was significantly better than placebo in reducing the need for medications to control asthma and the proportion of susceptible symptoms in participants with asthma in clinical remission stage. It showed that the low quality of life caused by asthma-related symptoms was significantly improved through acupoints herbal patching in Sanfu Days. Besides, acupoints herbal patching was as safe as placebo for chronic stable asthma. HKUCTR-1128, Registration date 22 Jul 2010.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 19%
Student > Bachelor 5 19%
Other 4 15%
Librarian 3 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 11%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 4 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 56%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 4%
Computer Science 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 06 February 2016.
All research outputs
#13,599,675
of 15,414,285 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Translational Medicine
#201
of 243 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#281,676
of 344,132 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Translational Medicine
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,414,285 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 243 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 344,132 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them