Study
Acupuncture for atopic dermatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Shuang Liang, Kai-Yu Huang, Lian Zhang, Mei Li, Hai-Hong Gu, Ning-Gang Chen · BMJ open · 2024
Read the original paper ↗The short version
This systematic review and meta-analysis pooled 8 randomized controlled trials with 463 participants (229 receiving acupuncture, 234 receiving a comparator) to test acupuncture for atopic dermatitis — also called atopic eczema — a chronic, relapsing inflammatory skin condition marked by itch (pruritus), dryness and rash. The most frequently needled points were LI11 (Quchi), ST36 (Zusanli) and SP10 (Xuehai), acupoints from Traditional Chinese Medicine's meridian system traditionally used to clear heat, calm itch and support immune balance; here they were tested against blank controls, sham (non-penetrating) acupuncture, or standard medicines like antihistamines and topical steroids. Across the eight trials — two from Germany, two from South Korea and four from China — treatment took two main forms: manual acupuncture (5 trials, mostly needling LI11, ST36 and SP10 for 15-30 minutes, one to seven times weekly over 10 days to 5 weeks) and fire acupuncture, where a heated needle is briefly inserted (3 trials, mainly paired with standard medicine). Two trials added retained press-tack needles at LI11 and the ear point Shenmen. Severity was tracked with the SCORAD index (combining physician and patient ratings) and the EASI (physician-only); itch with a 0-100 visual analogue scale (VAS); and quality of life with the DLQI questionnaire. Acupuncture significantly lowered SCORAD scores compared with control (MD=-10.61, 95% CI -17.77 to -3.45, p=0.004 — a drop large enough to clear the 8.7-point threshold doctors consider clinically noticeable). It cut itch scores even more clearly (VAS MD=-14.71, 95% CI -18.20 to -11.22, p<0.00001 — also above its meaningful-change threshold) and improved DLQI quality-of-life scores (MD=-2.37, p<0.0001), though that change fell short of the threshold considered clinically important. The EASI score, which relies only on a physician's rating rather than patient-reported itch and sleep, showed no significant group difference (p=0.08), and neither did blood IgE levels (p=0.07). Compared specifically with sham (fake-point) acupuncture rather than no treatment, real acupuncture still won out on SCORAD (p<0.00001) — evidence the effect is not just expectation or attention. Only mild, short-lived side effects were reported (bruising, limb numbness, mild stomach upset), and no serious harms occurred in any of the five trials that tracked safety. In atopic dermatitis, these results suggest acupuncture — especially manual or fire acupuncture at LI11, ST36 and SP10 — may help as an add-on to standard treatment, with itch relief the most consistent benefit and a good safety record. The review authors caution that only 8 small trials (463 people total) were available, most had weaknesses like unclear allocation concealment or blinding, and results varied a great deal between studies. Larger, more rigorously blinded multicentre trials are needed before acupuncture earns a stronger recommendation than a promising adjunct therapy.
Key findings
- A meta-analysis of 8 randomized controlled trials (463 participants total) found that acupuncture significantly reduced eczema severity as measured by the SCORAD index (SCORing Atopic Dermatitis, a combined physician- and patient-rated severity scale), with the improvement large enough to be considered clinically meaningful.
- Itch, measured with a visual analogue scale (VAS, a 0-100 self-rated scale), improved even more consistently than overall severity, including when acupuncture was compared against sham (fake-point) acupuncture rather than no treatment at all.
- Not every measure improved: the EASI (Eczema Area and Severity Index, a physician-only severity scale) and blood IgE antibody levels showed no statistically significant difference between acupuncture and control groups.
- Only mild, temporary side effects were reported, such as bruising, limb numbness, or mild stomach upset, and no serious adverse events occurred in any of the five trials that tracked safety.
- The review's authors caution that the evidence comes from just 8 small trials with inconsistent study quality and high variability in results, so larger, more rigorously designed trials are needed before acupuncture can be strongly recommended.
Common questions
What healing modality was studied?
Acupuncture -- both manual acupuncture and fire acupuncture, from Traditional Chinese Medicine -- most often needled at the LI11 (Quchi), ST36 (Zusanli) and SP10 (Xuehai) acupoints; two trials also used retained press-tack needles at LI11 and the auricular Shenmen point.
What condition was addressed?
Atopic dermatitis (also called atopic eczema), a chronic, relapsing inflammatory skin condition marked by itch, dryness and rash.
What were the main findings?
Across 8 RCTs (463 participants), acupuncture significantly reduced SCORAD severity scores (MD=-10.61, 95% CI -17.77 to -3.45, p=0.004) and pruritus VAS scores (MD=-14.71, 95% CI -18.20 to -11.22, p<0.00001) versus control, both changes large enough to be clinically meaningful; EASI severity scores (p=0.08) and serum IgE levels (p=0.07) did not differ significantly.
How strong is the evidence?
Moderate. This is a meta-analysis of 8 RCTs (evidence_level rated 'high' by study design), but the review's own risk-of-bias assessment found inconsistent allocation concealment and blinding, and heterogeneity was very high (I²=88-100%) for most outcomes, so the results should be interpreted cautiously.
What are the clinical implications?
Acupuncture appears to be a safe, low-risk adjunct to standard eczema care -- especially for itch relief -- with no serious adverse events reported across the trials that assessed safety; the trials studied it as a complement to conventional treatment, not a replacement, and larger, higher-quality trials are needed to confirm the effect.
This summary and its findings were generated by AI from the published paper and may contain imperfections. It describes a study and is not medical advice — talk to a qualified clinician about your own health (terms). The original study is always the source of truth — read it above.