The Effects of Auricular Therapy for Cancer Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract EN

Objective.

This study aims to systematically assess the efficacy and safety of auricular therapy for cancer pain.

Methods.

A systematic search was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library databases, CNKI, VIP, WanFang Data, and CBM for randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Review Manager 5.3 was used for meta-analysis.

Results.

Of the 275 screened studies, nine RCTs involving 783 patients with cancer pain were systematically reviewed.

Compared with drug therapy, auricular therapy plus drug therapy has significant advantages both in the effective rate for pain relief (RR = 1.40; 95% CI 1.22, 1.60; P<0.00001) and adverse effects rate (RR = 0.46; 95% CI 0.37, 0.58; P<0.00001).

And the result revealed that auricular acupuncture had superior pain-relieving effects as compared with sham auricular acupuncture (SMD = -1.45; 95% CI -2.80, -0.09; P=0.04).

However, the analysis indicated no difference on the effective rate for pain relief between auricular therapy and drug therapy (RR = 1.24; 95% CI 0.71, 2.16; P=0.46).

Conclusion.

Our meta-analysis indicated that auricular therapy is effective and safe for the treatment of cancer pain, and auricular therapy plus drug therapy is more effective than drug therapy alone, whether in terms of pain relief or adverse reactions.

However, the included RCTs had some methodological limitations; future large, rigor, and high-quality RCTs are still needed to confirm the benefits of auricular therapy on cancer pain.