↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of the effects of manual acupuncture and electroacupuncture at LI4 and LI11 on perception thresholds: a prospective crossover trial

Overview of attention for article published in Acupuncture in Medicine, January 2023
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
4 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Evaluation of the effects of manual acupuncture and electroacupuncture at LI4 and LI11 on perception thresholds: a prospective crossover trial
Published in
Acupuncture in Medicine, January 2023
DOI 10.1177/09645284221131339
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aiko Oyamaguchi, Hiroshi Hanamoto, Yoshiki Tanaka, Sayo Takahashi, Hitoshi Niwa

Abstract

The objective of the study was to investigate and compare the effects of manual acupuncture (MA) and electroacupuncture (EA) on current perception thresholds (CPTs) using quantitative methods. Twenty-nine healthy volunteers participated in this prospective crossover trial, in which three acupuncture methods were compared: control, MA, and EA. Acupuncture needles were inserted to a depth of 15 mm at LI4 and LI11 on the left side and retained for 30 min with or without electrical stimulation at a frequency of 2 Hz (EA and MA, respectively). The needles were removed and participants rested for 30 min. CPT in the left mental region was measured at 2000, 250, and 5 Hz, corresponding to the activation of Aβ, Aδ, and C-fibers, respectively, at four time points: baseline, T0; 15 min after needle application, T1; immediately after needle removal, T2; and 30 min after needle removal, T3. In the control session, only a sensory test was performed (without acupuncture). Significant effects of time course on CPT were observed (p < 0.001). CPT values increased significantly at T1, T2, and T3, compared with those at T0, at all stimulation frequencies during MA and EA. Changes in CPT values with EA were not significantly greater than those with MA. Both MA and EA increased the sensory thresholds of Aβ, Aδ, and C-fibers in the mental region for ⩾30 min after needle removal. Additional of electrical stimulation may not confer additional benefits over needling alone. UMIN000017983 (University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 4 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 4 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 1 25%
Professor 1 25%
Researcher 1 25%
Unknown 1 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 50%
Unspecified 1 25%
Unknown 1 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 January 2023.
All research outputs
#15,862,459
of 23,570,677 outputs
Outputs from Acupuncture in Medicine
#772
of 1,033 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#228,526
of 429,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acupuncture in Medicine
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,570,677 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,033 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 429,538 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.