Acupuncture and herbal formulation compared with artificial tears alone: evaluation of dry eye symptoms and associated tests in randomised clinical trial
| Autor: | Pat Lim, Aihua Hou, Qi-Ping Wei, Rajendra U Acharya, Jen-Hong Tan, Hla Myint Htoon, Louis Tong |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2018 |
| Předmět: |
medicine.medical_specialty
medicine.medical_treatment Molecular evidence Traditional Chinese medicine 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine cornea Internal medicine Cornea Acupuncture Medicine ocular Surface Adverse effect business.industry tears clinical trial Clinical trial Ophthalmology Artificial tears medicine.anatomical_structure 030221 ophthalmology & optometry Tears Original Article business 030217 neurology & neurosurgery |
| Zdroj: | BMJ Open Ophthalmology |
| ISSN: | 2397-3269 0221-9204 |
| Popis: | ObjectiveDry eye is a common disease with great health burden and no satisfactory treatment. Traditional Chinese medicine, an increasingly popular form of complementary medicine, has been used to treat dry eye but studies have been inconclusive. To address this issue, we conducted a randomised investigator-masked study which included the robust assessment of disease mechanisms.Methods and analysisEligible participants (total 150) were treated with artificial tear (AT) alone, with added eight sessions of acupuncture (AC) or additional daily oral herb (HB) over a month.ResultsParticipants treated with AC were more likely to respond symptomatically than those on AT (88% vs 72%, p=0.039) with a difference of 16% (95% CI: 0.18 to 31.1). The number-to-treat with AC to achieve response in one person was 7 (3 to 157). Participants in the AC group also had reduced conjunctival redness (automatic grading with Oculus keratograph) compared with AT (p=0.043) and reduced tear T helper cell (Th1)-cytokine tumour necrosis factor α (p=0.027) and Th2-cytokine interleukin 4 concentrations (p=0.038). AC was not significantly superior to AT in other outcomes such as tear osmolarity, tear evaporation rates, corneal staining and tear break-up times. No significant adverse effects were encountered. HB was not significantly different in the primary outcome from AT (80% vs 72%, p=0.26).ConclusionsAC is safe and provides additional benefit in mild to moderate dry eye up to 1 month, compared with ATs alone. Treatment is associated with demonstrable molecular evidence of reduced inflammation. Provided that suitably qualified practitioners are available to implement standardised treatment, AC may be recommended as adjunctive therapy to AT.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02219204)registered on 14 August 2014. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|