SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Effectiveness of Acupuncture in the Treatment of Parkinson's Disease: An Overview of Systematic Reviews.

Front Neurol · 2020-08-25

DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2020.00917PMID: 32973668

Open accessSystematic Review; systematic-review; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Background: The effects of acupuncture on Parkinson's disease (PD) outcomes remain unclear. The aim of this overview was to comprehensively evaluate the methodological quality and applicability of the results of systematic reviews (SRs)/meta-analyses (MAs) that examined the use of acupuncture to treat PD. Methods: Eight databases were searched to retrieve SRs/MAs on the use of acupuncture for the treatment of PD. Two reviewers independently screened and extracted the data using the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR-2) checklist to evaluate the methodological quality and using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria to assess the evidence quality of the included reviews. Results: A total of 11 SRs/MAs were included. According to the AMSTAR-2 checklist results, all included SRs/MAs were rated as very-low-quality studies. The GRADE criteria revealed 20 studies with very-low-quality evidence, 9 with low-quality evidence, 3 with moderate-quality evidence, and 0 with high-quality evidence. Descriptive analysis showed that acupuncture appears to be a clinically effective and safe treatment for PD. Conclusions: The use of acupuncture for the treatment of PD may be clinically effective and safe. This conclusion must be interpreted cautiously due to the generally low methodological quality and low quality of evidence of the included studies.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.