Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Acupuncture and headaches

  • Comment
The Daily Telegraph reported that, “even 'fake' acupuncture reduces the severity of headaches and migraines”.
Brought to you by NHS Choices
It said that a major review of acupuncture studies has found that it can help people who suffer from headache and migraine, “even when the needles are put in the "wrong" place”. It suggested that the success of both traditional and ‘sham’ acupuncture suggested a strong placebo effect.

This thorough systematic review looked at acupuncture for preventing tension headache or migraine. Acupuncture was found to reduce the frequency of headaches compared to taking no preventative measures (such as drugs or relaxation techniques) and only having medical treatment for the acute headache. The review also found that traditional and sham acupuncture seemed to have the same success at preventing migraine.

These results do suggest that acupuncture can potentially reduce the frequency of migraine or tension headaches. However, a systematic review is subject to the quality of the studies that it looks at, and these studies were of varying quality. Additionally, the review does not suggest acupuncture is better than medicine at treating attacks, and there is limited evidence comparing acupuncture to preventive medicines.

Where did the story come from?

Klaus Linde from the University of Munich, Germany and colleagues from universities and medical centres in Italy, the US and UK carried out the research. The work was published as two papers – Acupuncture for Migraine Prophylaxis and Acupuncture for Tension-Type Headache – in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.

What kind of scientific study was this?

These two systematic reviews collated and assessed the evidence for the use of acupuncture in treating headaches. Their aim was to investigate whether acupuncture is more effective than routine care or no preventative measures; as effective as other interventions in reducing the frequency of headache; and whether traditional acupuncture is more effective than ‘sham’ acupuncture (where needles are inserted into incorrect acupuncture points or do not penetrate the skin). The use of acupuncture has been dubbed ‘controversial’, its supporters suggest that it’s effective at treating pain through a range of physiological and psychological actions.

The researchers searched a number of medical literature databases for all relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that had been published up until January 2008. To be eligible for inclusion, the studies had to have followed participants for at least eight weeks after treatment, to have compared the effects of acupuncture with other preventative interventions, sham acupuncture, or a control (including no treatment or only treating the acute migraine episodes or tension headaches). In the studies, all participants had to have been diagnosed with migraine or tension-type headache.

Identified studies were assessed for their quality. The researchers then extracted information on the interventions used, patient groups (exact diagnoses and headache classifications used), and methods and results. They were mainly interested in response to treatment (defined as at least 50% reduction in headache frequency). They also looked at the number of days affected by migraine or headaches and their frequency, pain intensity and use of painkillers. Where possible, the researchers pooled the results from the individual trials.

What were the results of the study?

For the analysis of acupuncture for migraine, 22 trials met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 4,419 participants. There were an average 201 people in each trial, and the trials came from various European and Scandinavian countries. Six of the trials compared acupuncture to control (no preventative treatment or routine care). These found that people who had acupuncture had a significantly higher response rate and fewer migraines three to four months after treatment than those in the control groups. One longer-term study found that both effects were still significant more than six months after treatment.

The researchers found 14 trials that compared traditional acupuncture to a sham intervention. The effect of acupuncture varied considerably between individual trials. When the results were pooled, both interventions were found to improve migraine, but there was no significant difference between traditional and sham acupuncture for any outcome.

In four trials that compared acupuncture to preventative measures (mainly non-pharmacological, physiotherapy, relaxation etc), the frequency of headaches improved significantly with acupuncture with fewer adverse effects. There was no difference in response however.

For the analysis of acupuncture for tension headaches, 11 trials were identified with a total of 2,317 participants (with an average of 62 people per trial). Two large RCTs compared acupuncture to either no prophylaxis or to routine treatment of acute episodes only. Acupuncture was found to cause a statistically significant improvement in response compared to no prophylaxis, and this also applied to headache frequency and pain intensity. However, these effects were only investigated for up to three months after treatment.

A meta-analysis of five out of six trials that compared acupuncture to sham acupuncture for tension headache showed there to be a significant small benefit of traditional acupuncture over sham acupuncture. The researchers say that the four trials that compared acupuncture to other prophylaxis had methodological limitations and were difficult to interpret.

What interpretations did the researchers draw from these results?

The authors conclude there is ‘consistent evidence’ that acupuncture can provide additional benefit to routine care (i.e. giving no preventative treatment and only treating the acute migraine episode). They say that it is ‘at least as effective or possibly more effective’ than preventative drug treatment.

They also say there is no evidence that traditional acupuncture is any more effective than sham acupuncture for migraine. For tension-type headaches, they say there is now evidence that acupuncture could be ‘a valuable non-pharmacological tool’ for the prevention of episodic or chronic tension headache.

What does the NHS Knowledge Service make of this study?

These are thorough systematic reviews and are likely to have identified all the major clinical trials that looked at using acupuncture for tension headache or migraine. The findings suggest a potential role for acupuncture in reducing the frequency of migraine or tension headaches. Some points to consider:

  • The trials varied considerably in their quality, methods, interventions (particularly for sham interventions), patients, when the treatment was administered (e.g. as a preventative measure or for treating an acute episode), and the outcomes that were measured. This can cause some difficulty in interpreting the results, particularly for answering the question of whether traditional acupuncture is any more effective than sham acupuncture.
  • The researchers have given a clear interpretation of the current evidence, and discuss possible physiological and psychological reasons for their findings, but have not made statements such as all headaches are ‘in the mind’ – as several of the news reports have claimed – and they don’t give the placebo effect as the conclusive explanation for the effectiveness of both sham and traditional acupuncture, it is only discussed. In fact, the researchers acknowledge the limitations of the studies and that several studies were difficult to interpret.
  • The main body of evidence compares acupuncture to either no preventative treatment or to usual care. There appears to be very few studies that compare acupuncture to drugs used for the prevention of migraine, e.g. and whether the use of these was included in ‘usual care’ is unclear. The were few trials comparing to prophylaxis and those that there were compared to non-pharmacological treatments, e.g. physiotherapy, relaxation techniques etc. Therefore further research in this area is needed and any interpretation that acupuncture is better than pharmacological preventative drugs, e.g. beta blockers, should be made with caution.
  • Although some of the trials examined acute episodes, on the basis of this research, use of acupuncture has principally been considered as a preventative measure against future episodes of migraine or headache. The review has not concluded and does not suggest that acupuncture is as effective as analgesic and other treatments when a person is having an acute severe attack.

Links to the science

Linde K, Allais G, Brinkhaus B, Manheimer E, Vickers A, White AR. Acupuncture for migraine prophylaxis. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009, Issue 1

Linde K, Allais G, Brinkhaus B, Manheimer E, Vickers A, White AR. Acupuncture for tension type headache. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009, Issue 1

This article was originally published by NHS Choices

  • Comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.

Related Jobs