Skip to content

Effectiveness and safety of the electroacupuncture for intractable neuropathic pain

Evaluation of an effectiveness and safety of the electroacupuncture in the management of intractable neuropathic pain : A prospective, open-labeled, randomized, cross-over clinical trial

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
CRIS
Registry ID
KCT0003615
Enrollment
40
Registered
2019-03-12
Start date
2019-03-31
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2019-03-25

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

None listed

Interventions

Procedure/Surgery : 1. AC Group : period 1 (treatment A,6w) -&gt
wash-out (2w) -&gt
pain evaluation (1w) -&gt
period 2 (treatment C,6w) 2. CA Group : period 1 (treatment C,6w) -&gt
period 2 (treatment A,6w) 1) treatment A: add-on electroacupuncture (EA) treatment (1) During the treatment period, EA treatment will be performed with conventional medications for neuropathic pain.
of the maximum intensity that the patient could endure as “moderately strong but not painful”. 2) treatment C: conventional treatment (1) Only conventional treatments for neuropatic p

Sponsors

Seoul National University Hospital
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
All

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 1. Patients aged 19 years and over at screening 2. Patients who could voluntarily consent to the study, understand the process of the study, and adequately write a reportable questionnaire. 3. Patients who have peripheral neuropathic pain satisfied A and B, and identified C or D depending on the conditions. A. Having a confirmed medical history according to clinical findings (e.g., postherpetic neuralgia, chemotherapy induced peripheral neuropathy). B. Symptoms, history, and physical examination of patients are appropriate for peripheral neuropathic pain C. electromyography (EMG)/nerve conduction study (NCS) or evoked potential test is appropriate for peripheral neuropathy. D. Ultrasonographic examination at the screening revealed lesions that are appropriate for peripheral entrapment syndrome or peripheral neuropathy 4. Unsatisfactory pain relief despite of appropriate conservative treatment for more than 3 months before screening 5. A score = 13 on the Korean version of the painDETECT Qusestionnaire (PD-Q) at screening 6. An average socre = 4 on the Numeral Rating Scale measured by pain diary during the one-week screening period before randomization. 7. No evidence of disease (NED) recurrence in cancer survivors

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1. Other severe pain not related to the target disease induce confusion in pain assessment at screening or randomization. 2.Use of a prohibited concomitant therapy within 7 days prior to screening or a changed concomitant medication with restricted usage change within 14 days prior to screening. 3. Clinically significant unstable nervous system, ophthalmology, hepatobiliary, respiratory, blood disease, cardiovascular disease, or mental disease within 12 months before screening. 4. Use of electrocaupuncture treatment at the affected area within 1 month before screening. 5. Pregnant, breastfeeding, or expecting a pregnancy during the study period. 6. Implanted medical devices such as spinal cord stimulators, implantable drug delivery systems, pacemakers, automatic defibrillators, aneurysm clips, vena cava clips, and skull plates. 7. Brain damage, symptomatic brain metastases, or epilepsy. 8. Abnormal skin conditions that would prevent proper application of the EA treatment. 9. Participation in other interventional clinical trials within 30 days before screening or present. 10. Severe bleeding tendency: low doses of oral aspirin and a general dose of antiplatelet/anticoagulant medication generally do not limit study participation, but only when apparent risk is predicted by the investigator's judgment. 11. Using immunosuppressive drugs such as steroids.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Poportion on the Composite efficacy outcome (CEO) [NRS decreased from baseline + BPI-SF pain interference scale decreased by 20% from baseline + ‘slightly improved’, ‘moderately improved’, or ‘very improved’ in PGIC]

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Difference and proportion on NRS;Difference on the short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ);Difference on the Brief Pain Inventory-short form (BPI-SF);Patient global impression change (PGIC);EQ-5D-3L;PainDETECT Questionnaire (PD-Q);Difference on the Fatigue severity scale (FSS);patient satisfaction scale;incremental cost-effective ratio (ICER)

Countries

Korea, Republic of

Contacts

Public ContactSeunghoon Lee

Kyung Hee University Oriental Medical Center

aimforyou@hanmail.net+82-2-958-1724

Outcome results

None listed

Source: CRIS (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 16, 2026