Jin’s three-needle acupuncture technique for chronic fatigue syndrome: a study protocol for a multicentre, randomized, controlled trial (2019)

Sly Saint

Sly Saint

Senior Member (Voting Rights)
  • Wenjia Lin†,
  • Xin-lin Chen†,
  • Qi Chen,
  • Junmao Wen and
  • Xinghua Chen
Background
With an unclear pathomechanism, no confirmed treatment regimen has been established for chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). Acupuncture is applied as an alternative therapy for CFS. As a kind of acupuncture therapy, Jin’s three-needle acupuncture (JTN) has been applied to treat CFS. However, few large-sample randomised controlled trials on JTN treatment for CFS have been reported. We designed this study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of JTN treatment for CFS.

Method/design
This study is a multicentre, single-blind, randomised controlled trial. Patients who meet the inclusion criteria will be recruited and randomly assigned to either the JTN treatment group or the basic acupuncture group. Both interventions will be conducted for five consecutive days per week and last for 2 weeks. The primary outcome is the effective rate based on the 14-item Fatigue Scale (FS-14) score. Other outcome measures include the Fatigue Assessment Scale (FAI), the Depression Status Inventory (DSI), and the Self-rating Anxiety Scale (SAS). Plasma adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH), plasma cortisol, and serum levels of IL-2 and IFN-γ will also be measured in this study. Adverse events will be observed and recorded for the safety evaluation.

Discussion
This study may help to identify the efficacy and safety of JTN acupuncture treatment for CFS.
Click to expand...

https://trialsjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13063-019-3243-5

eta: trial registered in 2017;
This trial is currently recruiting participants.

eta2: this may be considered 'woo', but at least they are looking at actual biomedical 'markers' and acknowledge biomedical research results.
 
Last edited:
#1 The use of the Chalder Fatigue Scale suggests they're studying general fatigue, not ME/CFS. (https://me-pedia.org/wiki/Chalder_fatigue_scale)

Mainland China prefers FS-14 items. UK prefers FS-11 items (excludes items 5, 10 & 14). (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4730538/)


#2 What is the purpose & timing for measuring "Plasma adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH), plasma cortisol, and serum levels of IL-2 and IFN-γ" ?

How can we know that the plasma changes are therapeutic, or causing harm to the patients ?


upload_2019-3-10_23-13-11.png
 
Last edited:
This is a journal for people to publish their experimental design with no result data? Strange. This should be the methods section of their results paper.

But the real problem here is lack of comparison—they should compare Jin’s three needle technique with Chen’s four needle technique and most importantly with Zhang’s infamous “19 needles of death” technique.
 
Jaybee00 said:
This is a journal for people to publish their experimental design with no result data? Strange. This should be the methods section of their results paper.
Click to expand...
I think this advance publication of their plan for a trial not yet done, ie a protocol.

Jaybee00 said:
But the real problem here is lack of comparison
Click to expand...
I thought it said there would be a control group having 'basic accupuncture'. Calling it a single blinded trial I assume means the patients won't know which sort of acupuncture they are having.
 
If i understand correctly; poking holes in people is perceived to have therapeutic and/or medical value, for the patient? Poking more holes is perceived as better, at least by the practitioner, maybe they get paid per hole rather than by results?

I suspect we may also need comparisons between different sizes of hole, at different temperatures and depths. Maybe eventually leading up to a trial between a 3 needle technique and a single pointy boulder of crushing death technique.
 
Ahhh... a common mistake. It actually takes an irrational number of needles for it to work, and be a number between 5 and 8. Also the needles need to be made of moonrock and be blessed by the birth of a fawn in a water fountain on an odd day in April. 3 needles just won't cut it. So close.

Give it a few trillion years of trial and error and you'll definitely randomly stumble on the solution. Either that or invest in research funding and do it in a few years.

I'm gonna go ahead and be very bold here: a few years of well-funded research is less expensive and destructive than the trillions of years necessary to randomly find the solution to a complex problem while providing no help whatsoever to those suffering.

I'm genuinely surprised we haven't see a urine therapy trial yet. Might as well while you're firmly on the pseudoscience train.
 
Last edited:
rvallee said:
Ahhh... a common mistake. It actually takes an irrational number of needles for it to work, and be a number between 5 and 8. Also the needles need to be made of moonrock and be blessed by the birth of a fawn in a water fountain on an odd day in April. 3 needles just won't cut it. So close.

Give it a few trillion years of trial and error and you'll definitely randomly stumble on the solution. Either that or invest in research funding and do it in a few years.

I'm gonna go ahead and very bold here: a few years of well-funded research is less expensive and destructive than the trillions of years necessary to randomly find the solution to a complex problem while providing no help whatsoever to those suffering.

I'm genuinely surprised we haven't see a urine therapy trial yet. Might as well while you're firmly on the pseudoscience train.
Click to expand...
 
I've only skimmed this. I think acupuncture needs sensibly conducted and reported trials, it's a major treatment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom