The study was undertaken to compare the efficiency of managing migraines employing acupuncture and pharmacotherapy clinical processes. In the study, the researchers wanted to explore the shortcomings of the standard pharmacological therapy and understand why acupuncture was widely used (Zhang et al., 2019). The hypothesis for the study was that treating migraine using acupuncture is more effective than standard pharmacological therapy as acupuncture involves anti-inflammatory action that releases neuropeptides at the nerve endings.
The study participants for the review were adult patients who had a history of long-lasting or occasional migraine with or without aura. The study did not include patients who had issues with a headache but migraine only (Zhang et al., 2019). The study participants fit the population since the review used adults. Different clusters can be obtained by checking the adult population, such as ages 18-30, 30-45, and 45-60. Therefore, it means the study would be reliable since there would be a representation of the groups apart from children who may not give deep information or differentiate between migraine and headache.
The study design used for the systematic review is causal-comparative and quasi-experimental research (Kandi & Vadakedath, 2021). This study design fits the review by the authors because the researchers have attempted to establish a cause-effect relationship between the use of acupuncture and pharmacotherapy to treat migraine in adult patients. That means each shall be examined and results compared, including the rate at which each methodology is adopted and effective (Kandi & Vadakedath, 2021). The independent variable, in this case, would be the prevention and treatment of migraines, while the dependent variable would be the type of procedure used to get the results.
The overall outcomes of the study from the 706 search results with a total of 1430 participants showed that acupuncture was more effective in treating migraines when compared to the other pharmacotherapy method (Zhang et al., 2019). However, methodological collection prohibited the accumulation of the two sets of data. Sufficient implications for clinical practice were not discussed (Tanious & Onghena, 2019). The researchers only provided conclusion elements from the study based on acupuncture effectiveness and improved it. The study involved collecting data from a group that showed a high likelihood of adapting acupuncture more than the standard pharmacotherapy. Thus, it was not possible to obtain significant results from the measures involved in the study.
Various ethical considerations were met because the study has not disclosed the identity of the patients whose data was collected. Participation was voluntary, as the study was based on random trials for adult patients who had a history of migraines (Zhang et al., 2019). However, when asking a patient which treatment methodology they find functional, one might tempt them to disclose personal details so that they meet the full elements of the questions (Khalil, 2019). Some may show the researcher clinical records that may have other confidential matters. Under the hierarchy of evidence, the study lies under level I, which is evident from a systematic review (Hobbs, 2016). Under this level, randomized controlled trials have been utilized based on clinical practice guidelines.
References
Hobbs, R. (2016). Acupuncture research and scientific hierarchy. Medical Acupuncture, 28(6), 296-297. Web.
Kandi, V., & Vadakedath, S. (2021). Clinical research: An overview of study types, designs, and their implications in the public health perspective. American Journal of Clinical Medicine Research, 9(2), 36-42. Web.
Khalil, N. (2019). Ethical consideration of physical restraint uses in critically Ill patients. Journal Of Clinical and Medical Research, 6(3), 12. Web.
Tanious, R., & Onghena, P. (2019). Randomized single-case experimental designs in healthcare research: What, why, and how? Healthcare, 7(4), 143. Web.
Zhang, N., Houle, T., Hindiyeh, N., & Aurora, S. (2019). Systematic review: Acupuncture vs. standard pharmacological therapy for migraine prevention. Headache: The Journal of Head and Face Pain, 60(2), 309-317. Web.