Auricular acupressure for adverse events following immunization after COVID-19 vaccine injection: A multicentre, blinded, randomized controlled trial
Abstract
Background Some adverse events following immunization (AEFI) were observed in potential corelation with COVID-19 vaccination but without prevention or ongoing trial for it. We aimed to investigate efficacy of auricular acupressure (AuriAc) therapy in preventing AEFI after first dosage of the vaccine. Methods We performed a multicentre randomized controlled trial with three arms, including AuriAc, SAuriAc (sham auricular acupressure), and TrAsU (treatment as usual) group, carried out in four medical institutions in Chengdu, China, from March 17th to April 23rd, 2021. We enrolled participants based on eligibility criteria and randomized them into three groups: AuriAc (AEFI-specific auricular points applied, n = 52), SAuriAc (n = 51) or TrAsU (n = 44) group. Primary outcomes were percentages of any AEFI and local pain, and secondary outcomes were percentages who reported other AEFI. They were followed at 1, 3, 5, 7, and 14 days, by phone or online, with severity evaluated. Results 147 participants (73.47% females) were included with median age as 31 years (25–45, IQR). One day after the injection, participants in AuriAc group reported significant reduction on percentages of any AEFI [intention-to-treat, difference of percentage (DP) = −20.13, 95%CI: − 0.39, − 0.02, p = 0.01; per-protocol, DP = −22.21, 95%CI: − 0.40, − 0.03, P = 0.02] and local pain (per-protocol, DP = −18.40, 95%CI: −0.36, −0.01, P = 0.04), compared with TrAsU group. The effects were slight at other follow-up…
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 147 participants or records.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Global, regional, and national burden of hepatitis B, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019
- A meta‐analysis of anal cancer incidence by risk group: Toward a unified anal cancer risk scale
- Global fertility in 204 countries and territories, 1950–2021, with forecasts to 2100: a comprehensive demographic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021
- Exercise interventions in Alzheimer's disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
- Prognostic Significance of Carbonic Anhydrase IX Expression in Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis
- Glucocorticoid Resistance: Is It a Requisite for Increased Cytokine Production in Depression? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.