Article

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the blinding effectiveness of the Park sham acupuncture device using
participants' ability to discriminate between the real and sham acupuncture
needles. The design was a yes-no experiment.
Judgments were made on
whether the real or sham acupuncture needle was administered.
SETTING: University
laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: Healthy, acupuncture-naive university students and
staff (N=20; median age, 22y; range, 18-48y) recruited through convenience
sampling. INTERVENTIONS: Participants made yes-no judgments on whether the real
or sham needle was administered to 8 acupoints (4 traditional and 4
nontraditional) along the Pericardium meridian (Pericardium 3 to Pericardium 6)
on the dominant forearm. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The accuracy index, d', of
participants' ability to discriminate between the real and sham needles
(discriminability) was computed for the traditional alone, the nontraditional
alone, and a combination of both types of acupoints. RESULTS: The participants'
d' between the real and sham needles was not statistically significant from d'
equal to 0 for the combined traditional and nontraditional acupoints comparison
and the nontraditional acupoints alone comparison (combined, t(19)=1.20, P=.25;
nontraditional, t(19)=.16, P=.87). However, the participants' d' was
statistically significant from d' equal to 0 for the traditional acupoints
comparison (t(19)=2.096, P=.049). CONCLUSIONS: The Park sham acupuncture device
appears to be effective in blinding participants to real acupuncture intervention
when it is applied to the nontraditional acupoints and when traditional and
nontraditional acupoints are combined on the forearm along the pericardium
meridian. However, the sham device does not appear to blind participants
effectively when traditional acupoints alone are used for the same context.

Langue : ANGLAIS