Table 1

Summary of controlled clinical studies of Guasha for musculoskeletal pain conditions
First author (year)
Design/sample size
Conditions
 Intervention group (regime)
 Main outcomes
 Results
Tang (2008) [5]
 RCT/120
Fibromyalgia syndrome
 (A) Guasha (n.r., once per 3 days, 5 times total, n = 60)
(B) AT (30 min, once daily, 15 times, n = 60)
 1) VAS (100 mm)
2) Number of pain points
3) Response rate
 1) MD, -9.5, 95% CIs (-14.5 to -4.5) P < 0.0002 in favor of A
2) MD, -5.0, 95% CIs (-6.5 to -3.5), P < 0.0001 in favor of A
3) (A) 29/16/10/8; (B) 10/8/12/20
Improved
1.3 [0.94, 1.13], P = 0.01
Recovery
2.9 [1.55, 5.41], P = 0.0008
Chen (1995) [6]
 RCT/90
Neck stiffness
 (A) Guasha (20 min, once per 3~7 days, n.r., n = 30)
(B) Massage (10 min, n = 30)
(C) Electric current therapy (10 min, n = 30)
 Response rate
 (A) 27/1/2/0; (B) 27/2/1/0;
(C) 28/1/1/0
NS
NS
Ma (2003) [7]
 RCT/50
Cervical spondylosis
 (A) Guasha (1 session = n.r., once per 2 days, total 10 times, n = 15)
(B) Herbal injection (once daily, total 20 times,
n = 35)
 Response rate
 (A) 0/7/6/2; (B) 0/25/7/1
Improved
0.92 [0.74, 1.14], NS
Recovery
N/A
Wu (1996) [8]
 RCT/100
Cervical spondylosis
 (A) Guasha (n.r., once per 2 days, total 10 times, n = 72)
(B) No treatment (n = 28)
 Response rate
 (A) 39/0/28/5; (B) 14/0/8/6
Improved
1.18 [0.97, 1.45], NS†
Recovery
1.08 [0.71, 1.66], NS
Li (1996) [9]
 RCT/60
Scapulohumeral periarthritis
 (A) Guasha (n.r., once per 4~5 days, total 5 times, n = 30)
(B) AT (20 min, once daily, total 10 times, n = 30)
 Response rate
 (A) 18/8/4/0; (B) 10/10/8/2
Improved
1.07 [0.96, 1.20], NS†
Recovery
1.8 [1.00, 3.25], P = 0.05
Guo (1995) [10]
 CCT/76
Cervical spondylosis
 (A) Guasha (1 session = 20 min, once per 3 days, total 10 times, 2 session, n = 38)
(B) AT (1 session = 30 min, once per 2 days, total 10 times, 2 session, n = 38)
 Response rate
 (A) 29/6/2/1;(B) 19/7/9/3
Improved
1.06 [0.95, 1.18], NS†
Recovery
1.53 [1.06, 2.20], P = 0.02
Wang (2004) [11]
 CCT/240
Lumbar disc herniation
 (A) Guasha (1 session = n.r., once per 7 days, total 3 times, 3 session, n = 160)
(B) AT plus moxa (n = 80)
 Response rate
 (A) 32/69/45/14;(B) 11/27/33/9
Improved
1.03 [0.94, 1.13], NS†
Recovery
1.45 [0.77, 2.73], NS

n.r.: not reported; NS: no significance; AT: acupuncture; RCT: randomized controlled trial; CCT: controlled clinical trial; VAS: visual analog scale

Response rate was divided to four categories: (1) recovery, (2) marked improvement, (3) improvement and (4) no change

†We re-calculated the significance with RevMan for two categories: improved cases and recovery cases of each group.

The original authors reported a statistical significance for these studies (P < 0.05).

Lee et al. Chinese Medicine 2010 5:5   doi:10.1186/1749-8546-5-5

Open Data