Background: Evidence increasingly suggested that impaired respiratory function remained in about 40% of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) after discharge, jeopardizing their activities of daily living and quality of life (QoL) in a long term. Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) can improve exercise capacity and QoL in individuals with chronic lung disease; however, evidence on the effect of PR for patients with post-COIVD-19 was scarce. This study aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of PR on lung impairment for patients with post-COVID-19.Methods: Five databases were searched for all the published trials of PR for patients with post-COVID-19 from 2019 to October 2021. Data were extracted using a standardized form. The risks of bias of included studies were assessed using the Cochrane risk of the bias assessment tool. Data were synthesized where possible; otherwise, qualitative analysis was done.Results: Among 6,000 retrieved studies, 3 studies with 233 patients after COVID-19 were included. The pooled estimate of PR effect on 6-min walk test (6-MWT) (50.41, 95% CI 34.34 to 66.48; p < 0.0001) was in favor of the experiment group with clinical importance. It is found that PR could improve the symptom of dyspnea and QoL; however, its effect on pulmonary function test was inconsistent across studies. The risk of bias of included studies varied, with major concerns on the risk of blinding of participants and interventions performers.Conclusion: The review showed that PR could improve exercise capacity measured by 6-MWT among patients with mild-to-moderate lung impairment after COVID-19. The interpretation of effects on lung function, dyspnea, and QoL should be cautious due to inadequate and conflicting data reported across studies.Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021289562, identifier: CRD42021289562.

The use of acupuncture for treating Alzheimer disease (AD) has been increasing in frequency over recent years. As more studies are conducted on the use of acupuncture for treating AD, it is necessary to re-assess the effectiveness and safety of this practice. The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture for treating AD. Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Chinese Biomedicine Literature (CBM), Chinese Medical Current Content (CMCC) and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) were searched from their inception to June 2014. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with AD treated by acupuncture or by acupuncture combined with 1 kind of drugs were included. Two authors extracted data independently. The continuous data were expressed as mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Weighted MD (WMD) was used instead of standardized MD (SMD) when the same scales were used. Adverse reactions related to acupuncture were also investigated. Ten randomized controlled trials with a total of 585 participants were included in the meta-analysis. The combined results of 6 trials showed that acupuncture was better than drugs at improving scores on the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) scale (MD 1.05, 95% CI 0.16–1.93). Evidence from the pooled results of 3 trials showed that acupuncture plus donepezil was more effective than donepezil alone at improving the MMSE scale score (MD 2.37, 95% CI 1.53–3.21). Out of 141 clinical trials, 2 trials reported the incidence of adverse reactions related to acupuncture. Seven out of 3416 patients had adverse reactions related to acupuncture during or after treatment; the reactions were described as tolerable and not severe. Acupuncture may be more effective than drugs and may enhance the effect of drugs for treating AD in terms of improving cognitive function. Acupuncture may also be more effective than drugs at improving AD patients’ ability to carry out their daily lives. Moreover, acupuncture is safe for treating people with AD. Protocol registration: PROSPERO CRD42014009619. Protocol published in BMJ-open.

In order to investigate the therapeutic potential of acupuncture on patients with functional dyspepsia (FD), patients were randomized to receive acupuncture at classic acupoints with manipulations (treatment group) versus acupuncture at nonacupoints without manipulation (control group) once every other day, three times a week, for one month and were followed up for three months. The primary outcomes included dyspeptic symptoms, quality of life, and mental status. The secondary outcomes included the fasting serum gastrin concentration, and frequency and propagation velocity of gastric slow waves. Sixty patients with FD were included, among whom, four dropped out. After one month's treatment, patients with FD showed significant improvements in primary (in both groups) and secondary (in the eight patients of the treatment group) outcomes as compared with baseline (P=0.0078to <0.0001); treatment group has better outcomes in all primary outcome measures (P<0.0001except for SDS (P=0.0005)). Improvements on dyspeptic symptoms persist during follow-up (better in the treatment group). Acupuncture with manual manipulation had better effects on improving dyspeptic symptoms, mental status, and quality of life in patients with FD. These effects may be related to the increased frequency and propagation speed of gastric slow waves and serum gastrin secretion.

Diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-D) and functional diarrhea (FD) are highly prevalent, and the effectiveness of acupuncture for managing IBS-D and FD is still unknown. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of electroacupuncture with loperamide. It was a prospective, randomized, parallel group controlled trial. A total of 448 participants were randomly assigned to He electroacupuncture group (n = 113), Shu-Mu electroacupuncture group (n = 111), He-Shu-Mu electroacupuncture group (n = 112), or loperamide group (n = 112). Participants in the 3 acupuncture groups received 16 sessions of electroacupuncture during a 4-week treatment phase, whereas participants in the loperamide group received oral loperamide 2 mg thrice daily. The primary outcome was the change from baseline in stool frequency at the end of the 4-weeks treatment. The secondary outcomes were the Bristol scale, the MOS 36-item short form health survey (SF-36), the weekly average number of days with normal defecations and the proportion of adverse events. Stool frequency was significantly reduced at the end of the 4-week treatment in the 4 groups (mean change from baseline, 5.35 times/week). No significant difference was found between the 3 electroacupuncture groups and the loperamide group in the primary outcome (He vs. loperamide group [mean difference 0.6, 95% CI, –1.2 to 2.4]; Shu-Mu vs. loperamide group [0.4, 95% CI, –1.4 to 2.3]; He-Shu-Mu vs. loperamide group [0.0, 95% CI, –1.8 to 1.8]). Both electroacupuncture and loperamide significantly improved the mean score of Bristol scale and increased the weekly average number of days with normal defecations and the mean scores of SF-36; they were equivalent in these outcomes. However, the participants in electroacupuncture groups did not report fewer adverse events than those in the loperamide group. Similar results were found in a subgroup analysis of separating patients with IBS-D and FD patients. Electroacupuncture is equivalent to loperamide for reducing stool frequency in IBS-D and FD patients. Further studies on cost effectiveness of acupuncture are warranted.

We investigated the effectiveness of acupuncture in patients with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome. We performed this 32-week randomized, controlled trial with 8 weeks of treatment followed by 24 weeks of followup to compare acupuncture with sham acupuncture. Participants with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome were randomly assigned to acupuncture or noninvasive sham acupuncture. The primary outcome was the change in the NIH-CPSI (National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index) total score from baseline to week 8. Secondary outcomes were the NIH-CPSI subscale scores, pain severity, the I-PSS (International Prostate Symptom Score), the global response rate and satisfaction assessment. A total of 68 participants 18 to 50 years old were enrolled and included in intent to treat analyses. Baseline characteristics were comparable in the 2 groups. The reduction in the NIH-CPSI total score differed significantly between the 2 groups at weeks 8, 20 and 32 with a difference of -5.7 (95% CI -7.8--3.7), -6.7 (95% CI -8.9--4.5) and -7.4 (95% CI -9.8--5.1), respectively (each p 0.05). For all other secondary outcomes the acupuncture group was statistically better than the sham acupuncture group. Acupuncture showed clinical and long-lasting benefits compared with sham acupuncture for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome. Randomized controlled trials with larger sample sizes are needed in the future.

Acupuncture is a promising therapy for relieving symptoms in chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS), which affects >15% of adult men worldwide. The aim of the study was to assess the effects and safety of the use of acupuncture for CP/CPPS. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, CBM, CNKI, Wang-Fang Database, JCRM, and CiNii were searched from their inception through 30 November 2015. Grey literature databases and websites were also searched. No language limits were applied. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with CP/CPPS treated by acupuncture were included. Two reviewers extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of RCTs using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tools, respectively. Seven trials were included, involving 471 participants. The result of meta-analysis indicated that compared with sham acupuncture (MD: -6.09 [95%CI: -8.12 to -5.68]) and medicine (Levofloxacinand, Ibuprofen, and Tamsulosin) (MD: -4.57 [95%CI: -7.58 to -1.56]), acupuncture was more effective at decreasing the total NIH-CPSI score. Real acupuncture was superior to sham acupuncture in improving symptoms (pain, voiding) and quality of life (Qof) domain subscores. Compared to sham acupuncture and medicine, acupuncture appears to be more effective at improving the global assessment. Two trials found that there is no significant difference between acupuncture and sham acupuncture in decreasing the IPSS score. Acupuncture failed to show more favorable effects in improving both symptoms and the Qof domain compared with medicine. Overall, current evidence supports acupuncture as an effective treatment for CP/CPPS-induced symptoms, particularly in relieving pain. Based on the meta-analysis, acupuncture is superior to sham acupuncture in improving symptoms and Qof. Acupuncture might be similar to medicine (Levofloxacinand, Ibuprofen, and Tamsulosin) in its long-term effects, but evidence was limited due to high ROB among included trials as well as potential heterogeneity. Acupuncture is associated with rare and slightly adverse events. Protocol registration PROSPERO CRD42015027522.