Effects of Bloodletting Acupuncture for Subacute and Chronic Non-specific Low Back Pain

January 3, 2024 updated by: Andreas Michalsen, Charite University, Berlin, Germany

Effects of Bloodletting Acupuncture for Subacute and Chronic Non-specific Low Back Pain - a Randomized Controlled Trial

Evaluation of a bloodletting acupuncture at the fossa poplitea in comparison to bloodletting acupuncture at the regio glutaea and a waiting list control group in patients with subacute and chronic non-specific pain low back pain.

Study Overview

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Estimated)

108

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

Study Locations

      • Berlin, Germany, 14163
        • Recruiting
        • Charité Hochschulambulanz für Naturheilkunde, Immanuel Krankenhaus Berlin
        • Contact:

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Specialist confirmed diagnosis of subacute or chronic non-specific low back pain for at least 6 weeks prior to inclusion
  • Average pain intensity with at least 50 mm on the VAS from 0 to 100 mm

Exclusion criteria:

  • Serious illnesses
  • Poor general condition
  • Coagulation disorder, therapy with anticoagulants
  • Thrombophlebitis, skin inflammation in the area of the lower extremities
  • Alcohol, drug or medication addiction
  • Pregnancy
  • Lack of willingness to cooperate, linguistically or mentally unable to understand the contents of the study
  • Participation in another clinical trial during the study period
  • Starting a new therapy for the treatment of low back pain in the last 2 weeks

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
No Intervention: Waiting list control group
Experimental: Bloodletting acupuncture at the fossa poplitea
This group is treated with bloodletting acupuncture at the fossa poplitea. The treatment takes place twice a week from week 1 to week 3. This means that 6 treatments of approx. 20 minutes each should be carried out within the 3 weeks.
Experimental: Bloodletting acupuncture at the regio glutaea
This group is treated with bloodletting acupuncture at the regio glutaea. The treatment takes place twice a week from week 1 to week 3. This means that 6 treatments of approx. 20 minutes each should be carried out within the 3 weeks.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change from baseline in average pain intensity in previous week
Time Frame: Baseline, 3 weeks
Intensity of pain in previous week as measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale (0-100).
Baseline, 3 weeks

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change from baseline in average pain intensity in previous week
Time Frame: Baseline, 6 weeks
Intensity of pain in previous week as measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale (0-100).
Baseline, 6 weeks
Change from baseline in average pain intensity of the last 24 hours
Time Frame: Baseline, 3 weeks, 6 weeks
Intensity of pain in previous week as measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale (0-100).
Baseline, 3 weeks, 6 weeks
Change from baseline for back pain specific disability
Time Frame: Baseline, 3 weeks, 6 weeks
Use of standardized Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) to assess back pain specific disability. The scale ranges from 0 to 100, where 0 is the lowest level and 100 is the highest level.
Baseline, 3 weeks, 6 weeks
Change from baseline in pain bothersomeness in previous week
Time Frame: Baseline, 3 weeks, 6 weeks
Bothersomeness in previous week as measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale (0-100).
Baseline, 3 weeks, 6 weeks
Change from baseline for days with pain medication use
Time Frame: Baseline, 3 weeks, 6 weeks
Specific self-reported pain medication use
Baseline, 3 weeks, 6 weeks
Change from baseline for health related quality of life
Time Frame: Baseline, 3 weeks, 6 weeks
Use of standardized Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36). The scale ranges from 0 to 100, where 0 is the lowest level and 100 is the highest level.
Baseline, 3 weeks, 6 weeks
Change from baseline for pain self-efficacy
Time Frame: Baseline, 3 weeks, 6 weeks
Use of standardized Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ). The scale ranges from 0 to 100, where 0 is the lowest level and 100 is the highest level.
Baseline, 3 weeks, 6 weeks
Change from baseline for anxiety and depression
Time Frame: Baseline, 3 weeks, 6 weeks
Use of standardized Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). The scale ranges from 0 to 100, where 0 is the lowest level and 100 is the highest level.
Baseline, 3 weeks, 6 weeks
Change from baseline for work productivity
Time Frame: Baseline, 3 weeks, 6 weeks
Use standardized Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire (WPAI) to assess employment status and productivity. The scale ranges from 0 to 100, where 0 is the lowest level and 100 is the highest level.
Baseline, 3 weeks, 6 weeks

Other Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Number of participants with adverse events as a measure of safety and treatment adherence
Time Frame: 3 weeks, 6 weeks
Identify and assess self reported and unanticipated adverse events over the course of the study as a measure of safety and treatment adherence.
3 weeks, 6 weeks
Treatment adherence
Time Frame: 3 weeks
Assess treatment adherence according to attendance during 3 week intervention period.
3 weeks
Treatment expectation: effectiveness of bloodletting acupuncture in reducing low back pain
Time Frame: Baseline
Assess treatment expectation at baseline, Likert scale (1-very good effectiveness to 5-poor effectiveness)
Baseline

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

December 19, 2023

Primary Completion (Estimated)

December 1, 2024

Study Completion (Estimated)

December 1, 2025

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

December 19, 2023

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 3, 2024

First Posted (Actual)

January 5, 2024

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

January 5, 2024

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 3, 2024

Last Verified

January 1, 2024

More Information

Terms related to this study

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

  • Mikroaderlass

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Back Pain, Low

Clinical Trials on Bloodletting acupuncture at the fossa poplitea

Subscribe