RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Has the design quality of randomized controlled trials of Acupotomy improved over the past 18 years? -- CONSORT statement-based literature study from 2006 to 2024
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2024.10.15.24315538
DO 10.1101/2024.10.15.24315538
A1 Li, Junjie
A1 Zhou, Yantong
A1 Lu, Xinzhu
A1 Bian, Ying
YR 2024
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/10/17/2024.10.15.24315538.abstract
AB Acupotomy, originally named ‘Nine Needles’ in Ling Shu, was invented as a new type of TCM instrument in 1976, an innovative combination of acupuncture and surgical treatment. Its forward development is related to the Clinical effectiveness and safety. RCTs are gold standards in clinical practice and were welcomed in Acupotomy recently. The CONSORT Statement is set to guide the designing, analysis and interpretation of trials. But there haven’t been many Acupotomy RCTs until now, with few on quality evaluation, therefore design quality of Acupotomy RCTs is still weakness. This study aims to assess design quality of acupotomy RCTs by CONSORT statement, to analyze the overall quality status and influencing factors.PubMed database was used to search keywords like ‘Acupotomy’ and ‘Randomized Controlled Trial’. All 48 Acupotomy RCTs published from January 2006 to January 2024 were included. The CONSORT(2010) was used for quality assessment.48 studies were included for analysis, with 39 articles from Grade 3A hospitals and 9 from non-Grade 3A hospitals. Scores of RCTs ranged from 33 to 82, the mean score of 53.1 and median of 49. Grade 3A and non-Grade 3A hospitals differed significantly only in item 8, no studies reported item 18, and items 11, 14, and 23 had the highest frequency of reporting as failed.Based on 48 Acupotomy RCTs included, the publication time associated with the quality of reports. The number of authors and possession of funding were the most important factors affecting the total score. Number of beds, hospitals’ grade, sample sizes, and region GDP/PP did not relate to the total score. Among 25 items, Ancillary analyses, Blinding, Recruitment were the worst-performing items. Therefore, updating and standardizing the use of CONSORT can help to improve quality of RCTs, and cross-team communication and cooperation could promote the use of CONSORT.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical TrialN/A This article is an general evaluation of 48 published clinical reports that have been published within ethic approvals. The dates in this article were collected from these reports, which were published and ethically approved. Therefore, this article not involving clinical trails personally, and the ethics approval of human participants research.Funding StatementYesAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:N/A This article is a general evaluation of 48 published clinical reports that have been published within ethic approvals. The dates in this article were collected from these reports, which were published and ethically approved. Therefore, this article not involving clinical trails personally, and the ethics approval of human participants research.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.YesI 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).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesAll relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.RCTsRandomised controlled trialsCONSORTConsolidated Standards of Reporting TrialsTCMTraditional Chinese MedicineGDPGross Domestic ProductCAMComplementary and Alternative MedicineNK-FNeedle-knife fistulotomy