INTRODUCTION: This multicenter randomized controlled trial investigated the clinical efficacy and durability of shallow acupuncture (SA; superficial needling with concurrent active mobilization) for chronic neck pain (CNP).
METHODS: A total of 252 participants were randomized into SA, celecoxib, or wait-list groups. The SA intervention involved standardized superficial stimulation at biomechanically sensitized points coupled with active neck mobilization. Clinical outcomes, including Overall Clinical Efficacy, Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Neck Disability Index (NDI), Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS), 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) and Cervical Range of Motion (CROM), were evaluated at baseline (T0), post-treatment (T1), and 3-month follow-up (T2).
RESULTS: 238 participants were included in the primary analysis (14 dropouts). At T1, the SA group (n=81) demonstrated significant clinical superiority over both pharmacological (n=79) and wait-list controls (n=78). Beyond achieving profound analgesia, SA facilitated superior functional restoration and psychological recalibration. Crucially, these multidimensional therapeutic benefits were robustly sustained through the 3-month follow-up, whereas the effects of the pharmacological intervention diminished significantly after treatment cessation. The intervention was well-tolerated with no serious adverse events reported.
CONCLUSION: Superficial needling combined with active mobilization is a safe, clinically effective, and durable non-pharmacological intervention for chronic neck pain, providing superior and sustained pain relief and functional restoration compared to conventional pharmacological care. This trial was registered at the International Traditional Medicine Clinical Trial Registration Platform (ITMCTR, Registration Number: ITMCTR2024000219).
| Discipline Area | Score |
|---|---|
| Physician |  |
Physician rater
The analysis excluded dropouts, so it was not intention-to-treat. The wait-list group was treated after T1, which invalidates T2 comparisons with it. Severe pain and recent analgesic users were excluded. The sample (VAS 4–6, about 75% women, mean age 38) limits generalisability.
Physician rater
There was no sham or exercise-only arm, so needle and movement effects cannot be distinguished. Patients were unblinded. The clinical significance of cervical range-of-motion improvements is uncertain. Longer-term trials comparing it with exercise alone and sham needling are necessary, with at least 12 months of follow-up.
, McMaster University