Login to MyKarger

New to MyKarger? Click here to sign up.

Login with Facebook

Forgot your password?

Authors, Editors, Reviewers

For Manuscript Submission, Check or Review Login please go to Submission Websites List.

Submission Websites List

Institutional Login
(Shibboleth or Open Athens)

For the academic login, please select your country in the dropdown list. You will be redirected to verify your credentials.

Original Article · Originalarbeit

Editor's Choice - Free Access

Are Sham Acupuncture Interventions More Effective than (Other) Placebos? A Re-Analysis of Data from the Cochrane Review on Placebo Effects

Linde K.a · Niemann K.a · Meissner K.a, b

Author affiliations

a Institute of General Practice, Technische Universität München, b Institute of Medical Psychology, Ludwig-Maximilians University, Munich, Germany

Corresponding Author

PD Dr. Klaus Linde, Institut für Allgemeinmedizin, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universtität München, Wolfgangstr. 8, 81667 München, Germany, Tel. +49 89 6146589-16, Fax -15, klaus.Linde@lrz.tum.de

Related Articles for ""

Forsch Komplementmed 2010;17:259–264

Do you have an account?

Login Information

Contact Information

I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.


Background and Objective: A recent Cochrane review on placebo interventions for all kinds of conditions found that ‘physical placebos’ (which included sham acupuncture) were associated with larger effects over no-treatment control groups than ‘pharmacological placebos’. We re-analyzed the data from this review to investigate whether effects associated with sham acupuncture differed from those of other ‘physical placebos’. Methods: All trials included in the Cochrane review as investigating ‘physical placebos’ were classified as investigating either (sham) acupuncture or other physical placebos. The latter group was further subclassified into groups of similar interventions. Data from the Cochrane review were re-entered into the RevMan 5 software for meta-analysis. The primary analysis was a random-effects analysis of trials reporting continuous outcomes of trials that used either sham acupuncture or other physical placebos. Results: Out of a total of 61 trials which reported a continuous outcome measure, 19 compared sham acupuncture and 42 compared other physical placebos with a notreatment control group. The trials re-analyzed were highly heterogeneous regarding patients, interventions and outcomes measured. The pooled standardized mean difference was –0.41 (95% confidence interval –0.56, –0.24) between sham acupuncture and no treatment and –0.26 (95% CI –0.37, –0.15) between other physical placebos and no treatment (p value for subgroup differences = 0.007). Significant differences were also observed between subgroups of other physical placebos. Conclusion: Due to the heterogeneity of the trials included and the indirect comparison our results must be interpreted with caution. Still, they suggest that sham acupuncture interventions might, on average, be associated with larger effects than pharmacological and other physical placebos.

© 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel

Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview
Abstract of Original Article · Originalarbeit

Published online: September 07, 2010
Issue release date: October 2010

Number of Print Pages: 6
Number of Figures: 0
Number of Tables: 0

ISSN: 2504-2092 (Print)
eISSN: 2504-2106 (Online)

For additional information: https://www.karger.com/CMR

Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.