Search Results
Initially, 7,472 records were identified. After screening titles and abstracts, 7,406 records were excluded and the remaining were considered potentially eligible for full-text screening. Finally, 59 studies 20,28-86 involving 5308 participants published from 2003 to 2021 were included in this review. The flow chart of process of the study selection and studies considered for inclusion is shown in Supplementary Appendix 2.
Characteristics of Included Studies
The main characteristics of the included studies are shown in Table 1. Fifty-nine studies involving 5,308 participants were included. All of them were from China. Apart from Usual Care (UC) (defined as controlling blood pressure and blood sugar, physical exercises or pharmacotherapy for stroke rehabilitation, and no special treatment for depression), twelve various treatments were included. Among them, acupuncture (AC) with pharmacotherapy, which is divided into AC with Western Medicine (WM) and AC with Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), (in this case, traditional Chinese herbal remedies), and AC with both TCM and WM. There were also five therapies comprising AC plus non-pharmacotherapy, including repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (RTMS), Tai Chi, Cognitive Therapy (CT), psychotherapy, and moxibustion (AM). There was one RCT exploring the treatment difference between AC with RTMS and AC alone. One study investigated the efficacy of AC combined with Tai Chi in comparison with WM. Another study evaluated AC combined with psychotherapy. Eleven studies were divided into three groups, while others were based on two groups. Twenty-eight explored the effect of AC alone in comparison with WM or UC.
Assessment Results of Risk of Bias and Reporting Quality Based on STRICTA
The quality assessment results are given in Supplementary Appendix 3. Seven studies (7, 11.86%) had low risk of bias arising from the randomization process (Domain 1). Nine studies (9, 15.25%) were evaluated as “low” for the risk of bias due to deviations from the intended interventions (Domain 2). In terms of overall risk of bias, 26 studies were ranked as “high”, 27 as “some concern”, and 6 as “low”.
The assessment results of reporting quality showed that all of the studies (100%) reported the style of acupuncture (Item 1a), and 38 RCTs (64.4%) demonstrated the needle type (Item 2g). There were 39 (66.1%) studies that presented the “response sought” (Item 2d). Only 18 (30.5%) reported the “number of needle insertions per subject per session” (Item 1c). None illustrated the “setting and context of treatment, including instructions to practitioners, and information and explanations to patients” (Item 4b) and “rationale for the control or comparator” (Item 6a). The details of the STRICTA assessment for each study are listed in Supplementary Appendix 4.
Network meta-analysis
The network evidence plots were presented in Figure 1. The main results of the NMA for depression. Fifty studies involving 4,547 patients reported changes in depression scores in the HAMD scale, 21 for HAMD-17, 1 for HAMD-21, 28 for HAMD-24. The scores of different versions of HAMD were standardized. One study comparing the treatment of acupuncture combined with psychotherapy was excluded due to its failure to directly or indirectly connect with other interventions.78 Six three-armed-based studies and 43 two-arm based studies were included. A total of 104 arms were included, 41 arms for WM, 28 for AC, 11 for AC with WM, 7 for UC, 4 for AC with TCM, 4 for AM with WM, 2 for AM with TCM with WM, 2 for TCM, 1 arm for AC with RTMS, 1 for AC with Tai Chi, 1 arm for AM with TCM, 1 for AC with CT, 1 for AM. Among these studies, the largest number of studies were those comparing AC with WM (n=20). The following comparison type of studies were AC with WM versus WM (11, 22%) and AC versus UC (7, 14%). The main results of the NMA for depression are displayed in Table 2.
On the whole, interventions administering combined therapies were more effective in comparison with those using single therapy. The results of NMA showed that compared with WM alone, the administration of AC with RTMS, AC with TCM and WM, AC with TCM, TCM alone, AC with WM, and AC alone were superior in alleviating depression symptoms (MD, -8.75 95% CI: -16.75, -0.76; MD, -5.83, 95% CI: -11.22, -0.42; MD, -6.68, 95% CI: -10.16, -3.18; MD, -5.43, 95% CI: -10.73, -0.13; MD, -4.34, 95% CI: -6.64, -2.05; MD, -3.49, 95% CI: -5.19, -1.79, respectively). Compared to UC, AC alone or in combination with other interventions could lower HAMD scores (AC with RTMS: MD, -14.43, 95% CI: -22.81, -6.08; AC with TCM with WM: MD, -11.51, 95% CI: -17.85, -5.17; AC with TCM: MD, -12.35, 95% CI: -17.11, -7.62; AC with Tai Chi: MD, -10.19, 95% CI: -18.59, -1.83; AC with CT: MD, -9.64, 95% CI: -18.10, -1.21; TCM: MD, -11.11, 95% CI: -17.28, -4.99; AM: MD, -8.02, 95% CI: -15.73, -0.34; AC with WM: MD, -10.02, 95% CI: -14.04, -6.04; AM with WM: MD, -8.03, 95% CI: -13.17, -2.94; AC: MD, -9.17, 95% CI: -12.17, -6.22; WM: MD, -5.68, 95% CI: -9.04, -2.33). However, no significant difference was found among AC, WM, and TCM with AC plus any other treatment (AC with RTMS, AC with TCM, AC with TCM with WM, AC with Tai Chi, AC with WM, AC with CT, AM and AM with WM).
Examination of consistency with the node-splitting analysis approach indicated that there was no significant inconsistency (P > 0.05) (Supplementary Appendix 5). The analysis of heterogeneity showed the I2 of direct comparison was 97.66%, and the global I2 was 97.38%. The I2 of each comparison group was seen in Supplementary Appendix 6.
Table 3 presented the values of SUCRA, the hierarchy of thirteen treatments. According to SUCRA, AC plus RTMS had the highest probability in improving depressive symptoms with probability of 49.43%. The next were AC with TCM with WM (10.99%), AC with TCM (10.62%), AC with Tai Chi (10.30%), which were very close. The probability of AC with CT and TCM were 8.10% and 7.48% respectively. The figure of SUCRA was attached in Supplementary Appendix 7.
Pairwise Meta-Analysis
Ten studies56,58,64 40,45,54,55,62 29,36 used the Modified Edinburgh-Scandinavian Stroke Scale (MESSS) to measure neurological impairment. The of result of pairwise meta-analysis showed that AC was significantly associated with better neurological function improvement than UC or WM (MD, -8.45, 95% CI: -12.85, -4.05; MD, -5.11, 95% CI: -6.50, -3.73, respectively). Similarly, AC with WM and AC with TCM was superior to WM (MD, -5.07, 95% CI: -8.41, -1.73; MD, -5.32, 95% CI: -8.89, -1.66, respectively) (Supplementary Appendix 8).
The confidence assessment result of NMA
The CINeMA system (https://cinema.ispm.unibe.ch/) was used to classify the confidence in the results of NMA, which six domains was evaluated, including: (a) within‐ study bias, (b) reporting bias, (c) indirectness, (d) imprecision, (e) heterogeneity, and (f) incoherence. One comparison (AC versus AC with TCM) was ranked “high”; eight were “moderate”; eight were “low”. The details are presented in Table 4.