PMC:6927068 / 18420-20190 JSONTXT

{"project":"testtesttest","denotations":[{"id":"T86","span":{"begin":10,"end":19},"obj":"Body_part"},{"id":"T87","span":{"begin":1077,"end":1086},"obj":"Body_part"},{"id":"T88","span":{"begin":1199,"end":1204},"obj":"Body_part"},{"id":"T89","span":{"begin":1335,"end":1344},"obj":"Body_part"},{"id":"T90","span":{"begin":1458,"end":1463},"obj":"Body_part"},{"id":"T91","span":{"begin":1594,"end":1603},"obj":"Body_part"}],"attributes":[{"id":"A86","pred":"uberon_id","subj":"T86","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0001595"},{"id":"A87","pred":"uberon_id","subj":"T87","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0001595"},{"id":"A88","pred":"uberon_id","subj":"T88","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0000178"},{"id":"A89","pred":"uberon_id","subj":"T89","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0001595"},{"id":"A90","pred":"uberon_id","subj":"T90","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0000178"},{"id":"A91","pred":"uberon_id","subj":"T91","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0001595"}],"text":"Effect of auricular acupressure combined with ADs\nWithin the comparison between AAPADs and ADs alone, 14 trials42,44,46,47,49,52,53,57,59–62,65,66 reported the BP value before and after treatment. Even when we used a random-effect model, heterogeneity was too large (I2=82%), which might have been due to clinical heterogeneity or low methodological quality. Then, we tried to find the existence of this heterogeneity, and found that if we excluded four trials44,47,52,61 with outliers of larger BP value before treatment, the meta-analysis showed AAPADs had a better effect on reducing SBP than ADs alone (n=464 patients; MD, −5.06; 95% CI –6.76– −3.36, p\u003c0.00001; I2=32%) as well as DBP (n=464 patients; MD, −5.30; 95% CI –6.27– −4.33, p\u003c0.00001; I2=0%), which are shown in Figures 2 and 3. Twenty-one trials reported the efficacy rate, and the efficacy rate in the AAPAD group was significantly higher than that in the control group with ADs alone (RR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.17–1.26; p\u003c0.00001; I2=0%), which is shown in Figure 4.\nFigure 2. Forest plot of the comparison between auricular acupressure plus antihypertensive drugs (AAPADs) vs antihypertensive drugs (ADs) alone for the outcome systolic blood pressure (SBP) after treatment. CI: confidence interval; SD: standard deviation.\nFigure 3. Forest plot of the comparison between auricular acupressure plus antihypertensive drugs (AAPADs) vs antihypertensive drugs (ADs) alone for the outcome diastolic blood pressure (DBP) after treatment. CI: confidence interval; SD: standard deviation.\nFigure 4. Forest plot of the comparison between auricular acupressure plus antihypertensive drugs (AAPADs) vs antihypertensive drugs (ADs) alone for the outcome efficacy rate. CI: confidence interval; SD: standard deviation."}