Work

Effects of Acupuncture for Pain Control After Cesarean Delivery: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Year: 2025

Type: review

Study designs: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis

Abstract: Background: Postcesarean pain significantly compromises maternal well‐being and mother–newborn interaction. Given the side effects associated with conventional analgesics, alternative therapies such as acupuncture warrant consideration. However, evidence regarding the effects of acupuncture remains inconclusive. This systematic review and meta‐analysis aims to evaluate the effects of acupuncture for postcesarean pain relief. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published until July 23, 2024. The primary outcome was pain intensity at 24 h after cesarean delivery, assessed via Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) or Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Secondary outcomes included pain intensity at other time points, analgesic consumption, and safety profiles. Results: Six RCTs involving 614 participants were included. Analysis of the primary outcome indicated that acupuncture combined with analgesics significantly reduced pain scores at 24 h postcesarean compared to analgesics alone (mean difference [MD] −0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI] −1.04 to −0.13; low certainty). Pooled data from three trials showed superior pain relief at 24 h postcesarean with acupuncture plus analgesics versus sham acupuncture (SA) plus analgesics (MD −1.79; 95% CI −2.70 to −0.88; I 2 = 80%; low certainty). However, one trial reported that SA plus analgesics was superior in pain reduction. Another trial found acupuncture comparable to lateral quadratus lumborum block (L‐QLB) in pain alleviation. Results on analgesic consumption were inconsistent. No serious acupuncture‐related adverse events were reported. Conclusion: Acupuncture may serve as a promising complementary therapy for postcesarean pain with a good safety profile. However, the evidence quality is limited and heterogeneous. Further high‐quality studies are needed to inform clinical practice.

Source: International Journal of Clinical Practice

DOI: 10.1155/ijcp/6025759