Quality Assessment and Implications for Further Study of Acupotomy: Case Reports Using the Case Report Guidelines and the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist

Abstract

This review aimed to evaluate the quality of case reports where acupotomy was performed according to the CAse REport (CARE) guidelines and the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal checklist. Case reports on acupotomy published in Korea from 2013 to October 2020 were included in this review. A total of 28 acupotomy related case reports were selected, and a quality evaluation was verified using the CARE guidelines and JBI critical appraisal checklist. Among the case reports, spinal conditions/diseases were most commonly reported. The overall complete reporting rate for each study was relatively high (median of 63.4% according to the CARE guidelines and 73.4% according to JBI critical appraisal checklist for case reports and 62% for case series). However, low reporting rates were determined in several subcategories namely, “Intervention adherence and tolerability,” “Timeline,” “Diagnostic challenges,” “Patient perspective,” and “Adverse or unanticipated events” for case reports, and “Reporting of the presenting site/clinic,” “Demographic information,” “Statistical analysis,” and “Clear criteria for inclusion” for case series. When reporting cases where acupotomy was performed, it is recommended that the CARE guidelines are followed to improve the quality of research. In addition, new guidelines and tools for the clinical situation of Korean medicine should be developed.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 26 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.