Skip to main content

Table 3 EA response criteria and associated data

From: What intrinsic factors influence responsiveness to acupuncture in pain?: a review of pre-clinical studies that used responder analysis

Author (Year)

Behavior test for cut off

EA frequency

EA response criteria: Changes from the baselinea

(n, % = proportion of responder or non-responder)

Kim et al. (2014)

TFL

LF

Wang et al. (2012)

TFL

LF

HF

Kim et al. (2007)

TFL

LF

Ko et al. (2006)

TFL

HF

Lee et al. (2002)

TFL

LF

Liu et al. (1999)

TFL

HF

Tian et al. (1998)

TFL

HF

Tang et al. (1997)

TFL

HF

Han et al. (1985)

TFL

IF

Sekido et al. (2003)

PPT

LF

Gao et al. (2007)

TFL

LF

Takeshige et al. (1993)

TFL

LF

Takeshige et al. (1992)

TFL

LF

Fais et al. (2012)

TFL

LF

  1. aEA response criteria were differently applied. Researchers assessed with percentage change, p values or standard deviation: a) percentage change of during-EA or post-EA from the baseline, a’) converted into percentage change after direct contact to the author b) responder = significantly increase (p < 0.05 or p < 0.01) versus baseline, Non-responder = the others, c) Non-responder = post-EA TFL was less than baseline TFL + 3SD (p = 0.0014). HF, high frequency; HR high-responder, IF intermediate frequency, LF low frequency, LR low-responder, n.a. not applicable because of insufficient record, NR non-responder, PPT paw pressure threshold in normal rats, R responder, SD standard deviation, TFL Tail Flick latency