Functional GI Disorders
Subject Category: Functional GI Disorders
Am J Gastroenterol 2009; 104:1489–1497; doi:10.1038/ajg.2009.156; published online 19 May 2009
A Treatment Trial of Acupuncture in IBS Patients
Anthony J Lembo MD1, Lisa Conboy ScD2, John M Kelley PhD3,4, Rosa S Schnyer2, Claire A McManus2, Mary T Quilty2, Catherine E Kerr PhD2, Doug Drossman MD5, Eric E Jacobson PhD6, Roger B Davis ScD2 and Ted J Kaptchuk OMD2
- 1The Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
- 2Osher Research Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
- 3Department of Psychology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
- 4Department of Mathematics and Psychology, Endicott College, Beverly, Massachusetts, USA
- 5Department of Social Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
- 6Center for Functional GI and Motility Disorders, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
Correspondence: Anthony J. Lembo, MD, 330 Brookline Avenue, Rabb/Rose 1, Boston, Massachusetts 02215, USA. E-mail: alembo@bidmc.harvard.edu
Received 21 August 2008; Accepted 28 January 2009; Published online 19 May 2009.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES:
This study aimed to compare the effects of true and sham acupuncture in relieving symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS).
METHODS:
A total of 230 adult IBS patients (75% females, average age: 38.4 years) were randomly assigned to 3 weeks of true or sham acupuncture (6 treatments) after a 3-week "run-in" with sham acupuncture in an "augmented" or "limited" patient–practitioner interaction. A third arm of the study included a waitlist control group. The primary outcome was the IBS Global Improvement Scale (IBS-GIS) (range: 1–7); secondary outcomes included the IBS Symptom Severity Scale (IBS-SSS), the IBS Adequate Relief (IBS-AR), and the IBS Quality of Life (IBS-QOL).
RESULTS:
Although there was no statistically significant difference between acupuncture and sham acupuncture on the IBS-GIS (41 vs. 32%, P=0.25), both groups improved significantly compared with the waitlist control group (37 vs. 4%, P=0.001). Similarly, small differences that were not statistically significant favored acupuncture over the other three outcomes: IBS-AR (59 vs. 57%, P=0.83), IBS-SSS (31 vs. 21%, P=0.18), and IBS-QOL (17 vs. 13%, P=0.56). Eliminating responders during the run-in period did not substantively change the results. Side effects were generally mild and only slightly greater in the acupuncture group.
CONCLUSIONS:
This study did not find evidence to support the superiority of acupuncture compared with sham acupuncture in the treatment of IBS.
