Open AccessAcupuncture for the Treatment of Tension-Type Headache: An Overview of Systematic Reviews
Author(s) -
Jinke Huang,
Min Shen,
Xiaohui Qin,
Weichi Guo,
Hui Li
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.552
H-Index - 90
eISSN - 1741-4288
pISSN - 1741-427X
DOI - 10.1155/2020/4262910
Subject(s) - acupuncture , medicine , systematic review , quality of evidence , grading (engineering) , physical therapy , meta analysis , evidence based medicine , credibility , alternative medicine , medline , medical physics , pathology , political science , law , civil engineering , engineering
Objectives Because current evidence regarding the effectiveness of acupuncture for a tension-type headache (TTH) is controversial, we evaluated the reliability of the methodological quality and outcome measures of systematic reviews/meta-analyses (SRs/MAs) on acupuncture for TTH.Methods We conducted a comprehensive literature search for SRs/MAs in major databases from the database's inception to September 2019. The Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR-2) and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) assessments were used to assess the methodological quality of the included reviews and the quality of evidence, respectively.Results Eight reviews were included in the analysis. The AMSTAR-2 assessment results showed that the methodological quality of all included reviews was critically low. Thirty-six outcome measures were included in these reviews. The GRADE results showed that 25 (25/36, 69.4%) outcomes provided low- or very low-quality evidence, four (4/36, 11.1%) provided moderate-quality evidence, and seven (7/36, 19.4%) provided high-quality evidence. Descriptive analysis results showed that acupuncture treatment for TTH reduced headache frequency and severity.Conclusions Acupuncture appears to be an effective treatment modality for TTH, but the credibility of the results is limited owing to the generally low methodological quality and evidence quality in the included SRs/MAs.