Study
Effects of auricular acupressure on chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in breast cancer patients: a preliminary randomized controlled trial.
Jing-Yu Tan, Alex Molassiotis, Lorna K P Suen, Jian Liu, Tao Wang, Hui-Rong Huang · BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2022
Read the original paper ↗The short version
This preliminary randomized controlled trial with 114 breast cancer patients starting their first round of chemotherapy explored whether auricular acupressure -- pressing small seeds against specific points on the outer ear -- could ease chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), a side effect that standard anti-nausea drugs do not fully control. The study is grounded in the idea, borrowed from Traditional Chinese Medicine, that stimulating certain ear points can influence nausea pathways elsewhere in the body. To find out how much of any benefit was real versus expectation, researchers compared a "true" acupressure group against a look-alike "sham" version and against standard care alone. Women scheduled for chemotherapy known to cause significant nausea were split into three groups of 38: true acupressure (firm seeds pressed on seven ear points three times a day for five days), sham acupressure (soft, non-stimulating seeds at the same points and schedule), and standard antiemetic care alone. Everyone received standard anti-nausea medication regardless of group. Nausea and vomiting were tracked using the MASCC Antiemesis Tool, a validated eight-item scale, on the second and sixth days of the chemotherapy cycle, and quality of life was measured separately. Both acupressure groups did better than standard care alone for CINV occurring in the first 24 hours (acute CINV). More than half of the true acupressure group (52.6%) had no nausea or vomiting at all in that window, compared to under a quarter (23.7%) on standard care alone (a meaningful and statistically significant difference, p=0.01). Total symptom scores were also meaningfully lower with true acupressure across several measures (p-values from 0.001 to 0.004, with effect sizes edging toward "large"). The catch: the sham acupressure group did almost as well as the true group on nearly every measure, meaning much of the benefit looks like a placebo effect rather than something unique to real acupressure -- though the researchers note that a placebo effect big enough to meaningfully reduce nausea is still clinically useful. Neither approach measurably helped with nausea that showed up later (days 2-5) or with quality of life. Practically, this suggests auricular acupressure is a safe, low-cost option worth adding alongside standard anti-nausea medication for the first day of chemotherapy, with only mild, temporary ear discomfort reported by about 1 in 7 participants. The main limitation is that the study was small and not designed to definitively prove acupressure's own mechanism works beyond expectation -- a larger, more rigorously powered trial is needed to confirm whether the benefit holds up and how much is truly attributable to acupressure itself versus the ritual of treatment.
Key findings
- In this 114-patient pilot trial, adding auricular acupressure (pressure on ear points) to standard anti-nausea medication more than doubled the rate of patients who had no nausea or vomiting on the first day of chemotherapy (52.6% versus 23.7% with medication alone).
- A look-alike sham acupressure treatment performed almost as well as the real treatment, meaning a substantial part of the benefit may come from the ritual and expectation of receiving care (a placebo effect) rather than the specific ear points used.
- Neither real nor sham acupressure showed a clear benefit for nausea that developed later in the chemotherapy cycle (days 2 through 5) or for overall quality of life.
- Side effects were mild and temporary -- about 1 in 7 participants reported minor itching, discomfort, or pain where the acupressure seeds were taped to the ear, with no serious adverse events.
- Because this was a small, preliminary study without full blinding, a larger and more rigorously designed trial is still needed before auricular acupressure can be confidently recommended as a standard add-on for chemotherapy nausea.
Common questions
What were the main findings?
True auricular acupressure more than doubled the complete-response rate for acute (Day-1) CINV compared with standard care alone (52.6% vs 23.7%, p=0.01) and significantly lowered MAT symptom scores, but sham acupressure produced similar improvements, and neither active nor sham AA improved delayed CINV or quality of life.
Modality studied
Auricular acupressure (AA) -- non-invasive pressure applied to seven ear acupoints using taped vaccaria seeds, delivered 3 times daily for 5 days, compared against a sham (non-stimulating) version and standard care alone.
How strong is the evidence?
Low-to-moderate: a preliminary, pilot-scale randomized controlled trial (n=114, not power-based) with partial blinding only -- supportive but not confirmatory evidence.
Condition addressed
Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in women with breast cancer receiving their first cycle of moderately-to-highly emetogenic chemotherapy.
What are the clinical implications?
AA appears to be a safe, low-cost adjunct to standard antiemetics for easing acute chemotherapy nausea, though the similar performance of the sham arm means part of its benefit may be a placebo effect; a fully-powered trial is needed before firm clinical recommendations.
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.