- Suummary of the results of systematic reviews on the efficacy of acupuncture and related therapies in smoking cessation.
| Author, year | Comparison | Short-term (<6 months) | Number of participants (n of studies) | Long-term (≥6 months) | Number of participants (n of studies) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| White,40 2014 (Cochrane review) | Acupuncture vs. waiting list | 2 trials with high heterogeneity (I2=84%) | - | 1.79 (0.98 to 3.28); I2=57% | 393 (3) |
| Acupuncture vs. sham | 1.22 (1.08 to 1.38); I2 = 46% | 2588 (16) | 1.10 (0.86 to 1.40); I2=23% | 1892 (9) | |
| Acupuncture vs. nicotine replacement therapy | 0.76 (0.59 to 0.98); I2=0% | 814 (2) | 0.64 (0.42 to 0.98); I2=0% | 814 (2) | |
| Acupuncture vs. counselling and psychological approaches | 0.95 (0.72 to 1.26); I2=43% | 396 (3) | 1.34 (0.80 to 2.24); I2=64% | 396 (3) | |
| Acupressure vs. sham | 2.54 (1.27 to 5.08); I2=0% | 253 (3) | No studies | - | |
| Electrostimulation vs. sham | 1.13 (0.87 to 1.46); I2=0% | 634 (6) | 0.87 (0.61 to 1.23); I2=46% | 405 (2) | |
| Continuous auricular stimulation vs. sham | 1.69 (1.32 to 2.16); I2=16% | 1155 (13) | 1.47 (0.79 to 2.74); I2=22% | 570 (5) | |
| Zhang,66 2021 | Acupressure vs. sham or conventional therapy | Short term (1–3 months): 1.41 (1.04 to 1.91); I2=31% | 637 (8) | 1.85 (0.59 to 5.82); I2=14% | 74 (2) |
| Mid-term (3–6 months): 1.63 (1.27 to 2.09); I2=10% | 749 (8) | ||||
| Intradermal needle vs. sham | 1.62 (0.85 to 3.08); I2 = 64% | 346 (5) | No studies | - | |
| Transcutaneous electrical stimulation vs. sham or counseling | 1.27 (0.96 to 1.67); I2 = 64% | 485 (5) | 0.50 (0.05 to 5.28) | 76 (1) | |
| Laser acupuncture vs. sham | 2.98 (0.24 to 37.81); I2 = 96% | 427 (2) | 2.25 (1.23 to 4.11) | 160 (2) | |
| Acupoint catgut embedding | 0.99 (0.7 to 1.40) | 177 (2) | No studies | - | |
| n: number | |||||