Cupping therapy and chronic back pain: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Caroline de Castro Moura, Érika de Cássia Lopes Chaves, Ana Carolina Lima Ramos Cardoso and 3 others
PMID 30462793WHAT IT FOUND
Cupping therapy reduced pain more than control in adults with chronic back pain, but the trials varied in how cupping was applied and most did not describe good blinding.
The benefit is not enough to support a standard cupping protocol.
Key findings
01Cupping therapy reduced pain more than control groups in the pooled analysis of 10 trials (absolute difference between means: -1.59; 95% CI: -2.07 to -1.10; p = 0.001), but heterogeneity was moderate to high (I2 = 67.7%; p = 0.001).
02The review included 16 RCTs with 1049 adults, and 10 trials entered the quantitative pain analysis.
03Trial quality was limited: only four RCTs described masking, only two were judged appropriate, and most scored three on a five-point Jadad scale.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTsWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The pooled result covers pain intensity immediately after treatment, not long-term pain relief or function. The trials used different cupping techniques, suction methods, session numbers, durations, points and control groups, and the analysis could not separate these differences. Blinding was limited: only four trials described masking, and cupping can leave visible skin marks that reveal allocation. Most trials scored three on a five-point quality scale, and only 10 of 16 included trials contributed data to the meta-analysis. Two studies did not clearly state pain duration but were included because chronicity could be inferred.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the pooled pain reduction as proof that cupping is a proven, standard treatment. The trials used different cupping methods and control groups, most did not describe good blinding, and cupping leaves visible marks that can reveal allocation, so participants may have known which treatment they received.