How might acupuncture work? A systematic review of physiologic rationales from clinical trials

BACKGROUND: Scientific interest in acupuncture has led numerous investigators to conduct clinical trials to test the efficacy of acupuncture for various conditions, but the mechanisms underlying acupuncture are poorly understood. METHODS: The author conducted a PubMed search to obtain a fair sample of acupuncture clinical trials published in English in 2005. Each article was reviewed for a physiologic rationale, as well as study objectives and outcomes, experimental and control interventions, country of origin, funding sources and journal type. RESULTS: Seventy-nine acupuncture clinical trials were identified. Twenty-six studies (33%) offered no physiologic rationale. Fifty-three studies (67%) posited a physiologic basis for acupuncture: 33 (62% of 53) proposed neurochemical mechanisms, 2 (4%) segmental nervous system effects, 6 (11%) autonomic nervous system regulation, 3 (6%) local effects, 5 (9%) effects on brain function and 5 (9%) other effects. No rationale was proposed for stroke; otherwise having a rationale was not associated with objective, positive or negative findings, means of intervention, country of origin, funding source or journal type. The dominant explanation for how acupuncture might work involves neurochemical responses and is not reported to be dependent on treatment objective, specific points, means or method of stimulation. CONCLUSION: Many acupuncture trials fail to offer a meaningful rationale, but proposing a rationale can help investigators to develop and test a causal hypothesis, choose an appropriate control and rule out placebo effects. Acupuncture may stimulate self-regulatory processes independent of the treatment objective, points, means or methods used; this would account for acupuncture's reported benefits in so many disparate pathologic conditions

The patients' perspective on fertility care: a systematic review.

Item does not contain fulltextBACKGROUND: Patient-centered reproductive medicine (PCRM) is important for quality of care, and this is increasingly being recognized. However, its scientific basis is unclear. The main research questions addressed in this review are: 'How has the patients' perspective on fertility care been examined (method and quality)?' and 'What is the perspective of patients in developed countries on fertility care?'. METHODS: A systematic search of electronic databases was conducted and inclusion criteria with respect to eligibility and quality were applied. The methodology of the studies was critically appraised; the findings of the studies were synthesized and organized according to: patients' value clarification and assessment of service quality and dimensions of patient-centeredness. Additionally data on patient preferences and determinants of patients' perspective on care were collected. RESULTS: In 51 selected studies, patients' perspective on fertility care was examined with (few or many item) questionnaires and/or qualitative interviews. Significant methodological problems were observed. Fertility patients attached importance to seven out of eight dimensions of patient-centeredness (Picker institute) and two new dimensions 'fertility clinic staff' and 'skills' were developed. Overall, fertility patients want to be treated like human beings with a need for: medical skills, respect, coordination, accessibility, information, comfort, support, partner involvement and a good attitude of and relationship with fertility clinic staff. Patients' preferences between procedures and demographic, medical and psychological determinants of their perspective were defined. CONCLUSIONS: Fertility patients have 'human needs' besides their need for medical care. Evidence on PCRM is available but significant methodological limitations call for the development and validation of a European questionnaire