ABSTRACT
Objective Acute musculoskeletal pain in emergency department (ED) patients is frequently severe and challenging to treat with medications alone. The purpose of this study was to determine the feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness of adding ED acupuncture to treat acute episodes of musculoskeletal pain in the neck, back, and/or extremities.
Methods In this pragmatic two-stage adaptive open-label randomized clinical trial, Stage 1 identified whether auricular acupuncture (AA; based on the Battlefield Acupuncture protocol), or peripheral acupuncture (PA; needles in head, neck and extremities only), was more feasible, acceptable and efficacious in the ED. Stage 2 assessed effectiveness of the selected acupuncture intervention(s) on pain reduction compared to usual care only (UC). Licensed acupuncturists delivered AA and PA. They saw and evaluated, but did not deliver acupuncture to, the UC group as an attention control. All participants received usual care from blinded ED providers. The primary outcome was 1-hour change in 11-point pain numeric rating scale.
Results Stage 1 analysis found both acupuncture styles similar. Stage 2 continued all three arms. Among 236 participants randomized, demographics and baseline pain were comparable across groups. The diverse sample recruited was demographically reflective of the larger ED population. Estimated AA+UC (2.1; 95% CI: 1.6, 2.6) and PA+UC (1.6; 95% CI: 1.1, 2.1) 1-hour pain reductions were both significantly greater than UC (0.5; 95% CI: -0.1, 1.0), and participants in both treatment arms reported high satisfaction with acupuncture.
Conclusion ED acupuncture is feasible, acceptable and can effectively reduce acute musculoskeletal pain better than usual care alone.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
NCT04290741
Funding Statement
This project is supported by The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) Emergency Department Alternatives to Opioids Demonstration Program (ED-ALT) Grant number H79TI083109. This project was also supported by a grant through the Duke Endowment, administered through the Duke School of Medicine Opioid Collaboratory.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Duke University Health System Institutional Review Board has reviewed and approved this study on January 29, 2020 (Protocol No: Pro00104140).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.