English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  The effect and safety of catgut implantation at acupoints o treat allergic rhinitis (ICD-10 code J30.4) remain controversial. Here, we used a sham catgut implantation group to determine whether catgut implantation at acupoints is an effective and safe treatment for allergic rhinitis.    Methods  A randomized double-blind clinical trial, with parallel groups was conducted. Skin prick and puncture test (SPT) was performed to confirm the diagnosis before enrollment. The participants received two sessions of treatments of active or sham catgut implantation at acupoints (once every two weeks) with a follow-up phase of 8 weeks. The visual analogue scale (VAS) and Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ) were used to determine the severity of allergic rhinitis. The use of anti-allergic medication was used as a secondary indicator. The incidence of adverse events was also recorded and analyzed.    Results  An improvement of the VAS and RQLQ scores was observed in both the active and sham-controlled group sat four and eight weeks after the treatment in the self-control analysis. Comparison revealed no significant difference between the treatment and sham-controlled groups until 8 weeks after the 2-week treatment regimen ( t  = −2.424,  P  = 0.017). However, the RQLQ scores significantly differed between the two groups after 4 weeks of treatment completion ( t  = −2.045,  P  = 0.05) and this difference lasted until the end of 8-week follow-up ( t  = −2.246,  P  = 0.033). Throughout the treatment regimen, none of the participants took any relief medication, and no severe adverse events occurred.    Conclusion  Our findings suggest that catgut implantation at acupoints is an effective and safe method for symptomatic treatment of allergic rhinitis.    Trial registration  Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR-TRC- 12002191  (Date of Registration: 2012-05-09)

Effect of catgut implantation at acupoints for the treatment of allergic rhinitis: a randomized, sham-controlled trial