| Author, Year, Followup,a Pain Duration, Study Quality | Intervention | Population | Function and Pain Outcomes | Other Outcomes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Lynch, 2012217 (N=100) 4 months Duration of fibromyalgia, mean: 9.6 years Fair | A. Qigong (n=53): Chaoyi Fanhuan Qigong; 3consecutive half-day training sessions then weekly practice sessions for 8 weeks plus daily at-home practice for 45 to 60 minutes. B. Waitlist (n=47): continued with usual care; offered qigong after the trial ended | A vs. B Age: 53 vs. 52 years Female: 94% vs. 98% Previous opioid therapy: 42% vs. 30% Current opioid therapy: 36% vs. 23% Current NSAID therapy: 49% vs. 57% FIQ (0-100): 65.5 vs. 61.8 NRS pain (0-10): 6.5 vs. 6.6 SF-36 PCS (0-100): 30.0 vs. 32.6 SF-36 MCS (0-100): 38.1 vs. 40.4 PSQI (0-21): 13.8 vs. 13.1 | A vs. B 4 months Mean change from baseline: FIQ: −16.1 vs. −4.8; difference −11.3 (95% CI −19.3 to −3.3) NRS pain: −1.21 vs. −0.27; difference −0.9 (95% CI −1.7 to −0.1) | A vs. B 4 months Mean change from baseline: SF-36 PCS: 4.6 vs. 0.2; difference 4.4 (95% CI 1.5 to 7.3) SF-36 MCS: 4.4 vs. 0.7; difference 3.7 (95% CI −0.3 to 7.7) |
Wang, 2010218 (N=66) 3 months Duration of fibromyalgia pain: 11 years Fair | A. Tai chi (n=33) Classic Yang style tai chi; at home practice for at least 20 minutes a day; encouraged to maintain tai chi practice using an instructional video. B. Attention control (n=33): 40 minutes of education then 20 minutes of supervised stretching (upper body, trunk, and lower body); plus 20 minutes of daily at-home stretching Both groups had 60-minute sessions twice a week for 12 weeks and continued regular medications and routine activities. | A vs. B Age: 50 vs. 51 years Female: 85% vs. 88% Analgesic use: 88% vs. 73% FIQ (0-100): 62.9 vs. 68.0 VAS pain (0-10): 5.8 vs. 6.3 CES-D (0-60): 22.6 vs. 27.8 SF-36 PCS (0-100): 28.5 vs. 28.0 SF-36 MCS (0-100): 42.6 vs. 37.8 PSQI (0-21): 13.9 vs. 13.5 | A vs. B 3 months Proportion with clinically meaningful improvement: FIQb: 81.8% vs. 51.5%; RR 1.6 (95% CI 1.1 to 2.3) VAS painc: 54.5% vs. 27.3%; RR 2.0 (95% CI 1.1 to 3.8) Mean change from baseline: FIQ: −28.6 vs. −10.2; difference −18.3 (95% CI −27.1 to −9.6) VAS pain: −2.4 vs. −0.7; difference −1.7 (95% CI −2.7 to −0.8) | A vs. B 3 months Proportion with clinically meaningful improvement: CES-Dd: 69.7% vs. 39.4%; RR 1.8 (95% CI 1.1 to 2.9) SF-36 PCSe: 51.5% vs. 15.2%; RR 3.4 (95% CI 1.4 to 8.1) SF-36 MCSf: 48.5% vs. 24.2%; RR 2.0 (95% CI 1.0 to 4.0) PSQIg: 45.5% vs. 18.2%; RR 2.5 (95% CI 1.1 to 5.6) Mean change from baseline: CES-D: −6.5 vs. −2.4; difference −4.1 (95% CI −8.2 to 0.1) SF-36 PCS: 8.4 vs. 1.5; difference 7.0 (95% CI 2.9 to 11.0) SF-36 MCS: 8.5 vs. 1.2; difference 7.3 (95% CI 1.9 to 12.8) |
Wang, 2018223 All groups were assessed at 12, 24, and 52 weeks from the start of treatment Duration of pain: Mean 11.1 to 13.8 years Fair [New trial] | A. Yang style tai chi (n=39): one 60-minute session/week for 12 weeks. Mean adherence rate (SD): 66.7% (28.7%) B. Yang style tai chi (n=37): two 60-minute sessions/week for 12 weeks. Mean adherence rate (SD): 65.1% (26%) C. Yang style tai chi (n=39): one 60-minute session/week for 24 weeks. Mean adherence rate (SD): 57.2% (27.9%) D. Yang style tai chi (n=36): two 60-minute sessions/week for 24 weeks. Mean adherence rate (SD): 57.8% (33.3%) E. Aerobic exercise (n=75): two 60-minute sessions/week for 24 weeks. All groups received educational information about the importance of physical activity and home practice; encouraged to integrate at least 30 minutes of tai chi or aerobic exercise into their daily routine; asked to continue exercise after completing their 12 week or 24 week sessions, as well as throughout 52 weeks of followup. | A vs. B vs. C. vs. D vs. E Age: 53 vs. 52 vs. 51 vs. 52 vs. 51 years Female: 85% vs. 81% vs. 97% vs. 100% vs. 96% Baseline FIQ-R (0-100): 52.4 vs. 53.8 vs. 56.5 vs. 60.4 vs. 57.3 | All results reported as mean change from baseline (95% CI) C vs. E 6 months FIQ-R: −16.7 (−23.4 to −10.1) vs. −9.2 (−14.3 to −4.1) 12 months FIQ-R: −13.6 (−20.4 to −6.8) vs. −11.7 (−16.7 to −6.6) D vs. E 6 months FIQ-R: −25.4 (−32.3 to −18.4) vs. −9.2 (−14.3 to −4.1); difference 16.2 (8.7 to 23.6), p<0.001 12 months FIQ-R: −22.7 (−30.0 to −15.4) vs. −11.7 (−16.7 to −6.6); difference 11.1 (2.7 to 19.6), p=0.01 Any tai chi vs. E 3-6 months FIQ-R; differnce 5.5, (0.6 to 10.4) p=0.03 6-12 months | All results reported as mean change from baseline (95% CI) C vs. E 6 months SS (0-12): −1.8 (−2.6 to −1.0) vs. −0.8 (−1.4 to −0.2) PGAS (0-10): −1.6 (−2.4 to −0.8) vs. −0.4 (−1.0 to 0.2) HAQ (0-100): −3.9 (−8.6 to 0.9) vs. −4.1 (−7.8 to −0.5) BDI (0-63): −7.5 (−10.8 to −4.1) vs. −5.2 (−7.7 to −2.7) HADS-D (0-21): −1.4 (−2.6 to 0.3) vs. −0.6 (−1.5 to 0.4) HADS-A (0-21): −1.4 (−2.5 to −0.2) vs. 0.0 (−0.9 to 0.9) SF-36 MCS (0-100): 5.3 (1.9 to 8.7) vs. 0.9 (−1.8 to 3.6) SF-36 PCS (0-100): 5.0(2.5 to 7.6) vs. 4.0 (2.0 to 6.0) PSQI (0-100): −1.9 (−3.2 to −0.6) vs. −1.1 (−2.1 to −0.1) 12 months SS: −1.4 (−2.3 to −0.6) vs. −1.1 (−1.8 to −0.4) PGAS: −1.4 (−2.2 to −0.5) vs. −0.3 (−0.9 to 0.3) HAQ: −3.5 (−8.8 to 1.8) vs. −3.9 (−7.8 to 0.0) BDI: −5.5 (−9.4 to −1.6) vs. −6.4 (−9.3 to −3.5) HADS-D: −0.9 (−2.2 to 0.5) vs. −0.6 (−1.6 to 0.4) HADS-A: −1.3 (−2.7 to 0.0) vs. −0.4 (−1.4 to 0.6) SF-36 MCS: 3.8 (−0.5 to 8.0) vs. 3.0 (−0.1 to 6.0) SF-36 PCS: 6.9 (3.9 to 9.9) vs. 2.6 (0.4 to 4.7) PSQI: −1.1 (−2.6 to 0.4) vs. −1.2 (−2.3 to −0.1) D vs. E 6 months SS: −1.7 (−2.5 to −0.8) vs. −0.8 (−1.4 to −0.2); difference 0.9 (−0.1 to 1.9), p=0.09 PGAS: −2.0 (−2.8 to −1.2) vs. −0.4 (−1.0 to 0.2); difference 1.6 (0.7 to 2.5), p=0.0006 HAQ: −6.7 (−12.0 to −1.3) vs. −4.1 (−7.8 to −0.5); difference 2.4 (−4.3 to 9.0), p=0.48 BDI: −9.5 (−13.0 to −6.0) vs. −5.2 (−7.7 to −2.7); difference 4.3 (0.0 to 8.5), p=0.049 HADS-D: −2.7 (−4.1 to 1.4) vs. −0.6 (−1.5 to 0.4); difference 2.1 (0.5 to 3.7), p=0.01 HADS-A: −2.1 (−3.4 to −0.8) vs. 0.0 (−0.9 to 0.9); difference 2.1 (0.6 to 3.6), p=0.008 SF-36 MCS: 7.4 (3.6 to 11.2) vs. 0.9 (−1.8 to 3.6); difference 6.2 (1.9 to 10.6), p=0.006 SF-36 PCS: 5.9 (3.1 to 8.8) vs. 4.0 (2.0 to 6.0); difference 2.0 (−1.3 to 5.3), p=0.24 PSQI: −2.1 (−3.5 to −0.7) vs. −1.1 (−2.1 to −0.1); difference 1.0 (−0.6 to 2.5), p=0.22 12 months SS: −1.8 (−2.8 to −0.9) vs. −1.1 (−1.8 to −0.4); difference 0.7 (−0.3 to 1.8), p=0.18 PGAS: −1.7 (−2.7 to −0.8) vs. −0.3 (−0.9 to 0.3); difference 1.5 (0.4 to 2.5), p=0.008 HAQ: −5.0 (−10.8 to 0.7) vs. −3.9 (−7.8 to 0.0); difference 1.8 (−5.9 to 9.4), p=0.65 BDI: −11.1 (−15.2 to −6.9) vs. −6.4 (−9.3 to −3.5); difference 4.6 (−0.5 to 9.7), p=0.08 HADS-D: −2.2 (−3.7 to 0.8) vs. −0.6 (−1.6 to 0.4); difference 1.6 (0.0 to 3.2), p=0.05 HADS-A: −2.1 (−3.6 to −0.7) vs. −0.4 (−1.4 to 0.6); difference 1.6 (0.1 to 3.1), p=0.04 SF-36 MCS: 5.4 (0.8 to 9.9) vs. 3.0 (−0.1 to 6.0); difference 2.2 (−2.7 to 7.1), p=0.38 SF-36 PCS 5.4 (2.2 to 8.6): vs. 2.6 (0.4 to 4.7); difference 3.0 (−0.7 to 6.8), p=0.11 PSQI: −2.0 (−3.6 to −0.4) vs. −1.2 (−2.3 to −0.1); difference 0.9 (−0.7 to 2.5), p=0.26 Any tai chi vs. E: Change in narcotics use: 24 weeks: OR 0.89 (0.28, 2.80) 52 weeks: OR 1.08 (0.33, 3.51) |
BDI = Beck Depression Inventory; CES-D = Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression index; CI = confidence interval; FIQ = Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire; HADS = Hospital Anxiety and Depression Score; MCS = Mental Component Summary; NRS = numeric rating scale; NSAIDs = nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; PCS = Physical Component Summary; PSQI = Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index; RR = risk ratio; SF-36 = Short-Form-36 Questionaire; SS = Symptom Severity; VAS = visual analog scale
Unless otherwise noted, followup time is calculated from the end of the treatment period
A reduction of ≥8.1 points from baseline on the FIQ was considered a clinically meaningful improvement
A reduction of ≥2 points from baseline on the VAS was considered a clinically meaningful improvement
A reduction of ≥6 points from baseline on the CES-D was considered a clinically meaningful improvement
An increase of ≥6.5 points from baseline on the SF-36 PCS was considered a clinically meaningful improvement
An increase of ≥7.9 points from baseline on the SF-36 MCS was considered a clinically meaningful improvement
A reduction of >5 points from baseline on the PSQI was considered a clinically meaningful improvement
From: Results
NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.