Skip to main content

Table 6 Studies excluded from analyzes because of insufficient information

From: Effect of acustimulation on nausea and vomiting and on hyperemesis in pregnancy: a systematic review of Western and Chinese literature

Reason for exclusion Study Significance for treatment group according to author
No measure of variability Shin 2007 - significant for degree of nausea and vomiting
- significant reduction for ketonuria levels over time by women with HG.
  Li 2010 - significant difference (P <0.05) for the severity and frequency of nausea and vomiting).
- ketone bodies disappeared in the 2 acupressure groups significantly faster (p < 0.05) than in the group with IV fluid therapy.
  Liu 2012 - a statistically significant difference (P <0.05) for the severity and frequency of nausea and vomiting compared to IV fluid therapy.
Data reported in Mean and interquartile range (IQR) Rad 2012 - statistically significant difference favouring Youmen acupressure over sham acupressure
  Heazell - no difference between length of stay, amount of medication, or fluid required between the acupressure and placebo groups
- acupressure reduced the number of patients who stayed more than four nights in the hospital.
  Knight - no statistically significant difference between the control and intervention groups.
Data reported in Mean rank Steele - The treatment group had significantly less frequency and severity of nausea and vomiting of pregnancy than the placebo group
  Can Gurkan - Acupressure would appear to be effective in symptom control, and alleviation and placebo effects in reducing the symptoms of nausea and vomiting during pregnancy.
Data reported only means of error bar plots O’Brien 1996 - No benefit of acupressure for symptom relief compared with either sham acupressure or no treatment