Objectives: To ascertain whether ear acupuncture (modified Battlefield technique) as an adjunct (Adj-BFA) to standard analgesia care (SAC) significantly reduces pain scores compared with sham acupuncture (Adj-Sham) or SAC alone, when delivered by medical and nursing practitioners in an ED.
Methods: A randomised controlled trial using a convenience sample of 90 patients attending an ED with acute abdominal, limb trauma or low back pain were allocated to three treatment arms: Adj-BFA, Adj-Sham and SAC. The primary outcome of change in pain scores out-of-10 (NPRS-10) from triage were assessed immediately after intervention and at 1 and 2 h post-intervention. Secondary outcomes were the percentage of patients reporting 'adequate analgesia' or ≥30% reduction in pain score, analgesic medication use (in morphine equivalent dose [milligrammes]), analgesics and needle costs (Australian dollars), adverse effects and patient satisfaction (Likert scale).
Results: There was no significant difference in pain scores (P = 0.582) or secondary outcomes measures between Adj-BFA, Adj-Sham and SAC.
Conclusion: The present study on 90 patients did not show a significant difference in analgesia outcomes in the first 2 h using Adj-BFA for acute pain in the ED, and there were no significant differences for secondary outcomes between treatment arms. Given the mixed results of recent BFA trials, further research using the original BFA technique on different painful conditions, as either stand-alone or as-adjunct to non-opioid analgesia are needed before BFA can be recommended as a technique for acute pain management in the ED.
Keywords: acupuncture; acupuncture therapy; acute pain; battlefield acupuncture; emergency department.
© 2020 Australasian College for Emergency Medicine.