目的：针刺和艾灸治疗躯体疼痛的临床试验为研究对象，借用视觉模拟评分（Visual Analogue Scale，VAS）为主要研究指标，系统评价针刺和艾灸两者之间镇痛效果的差异。方法：以Pubmed、Science citation index、Embase、The Cochrane Library、Google scholar、中国知网、万方、维普、中国生物医学数据库为主要检索数据库。以考克兰偏倚评价方式来评估各文献的偏倚，治疗前后VAS的变化为主要观察指标。根据治疗后不同时期的VAS，分成1、2、3、4周，分别合并相同时期的研究进行分析。结果：检索出的382篇经过筛选后，对8篇符合纳入标准的文献进行研究，其中有1篇文献分成3个研究分别纳入。纳入文献的偏倚风险主要被认定为偏倚不清，主要源于分配方案隐藏、选择性报道等方面的信息不全。采用随机效应模型分析，治疗后第1[合并MD=0.19，95%CI（-0.13，0.5），P=0.05]、2[合并MD=-0.12，95%CI（-0.91，0.68），P=0.77]、4[合并MD=0.00,95%CI（-0.71，0.07），P=0.99] 周VAS变化数据提示针刺和艾灸对躯体疼痛的镇痛效果不存在统计学差异。敏感性分析发现，任何一组在固定、随机效应模型上不存在明显差异。结论：因为所纳入研究本身质量较低，符合要求的研究太少，通过分析针刺和艾灸的镇痛效果的比较，无法得出两者之间孰优孰劣的判断，尚待更加科学、规范的临床随机对照试验证明两者镇痛效果的差异。

This study was aimed to investigate the different analgesia effect of acupuncture and moxibustion on somatic pain.Clinical studies involved the comparison between acupuncture and moxibustion on the somatic pain were potential targets.The visual analogue scale(VAS)was identified as the primary outcome.The research databases were the Pubmed,science citation index(SCI), Embase,The Cochrane Library,Google scholar,Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure(CNKI),Wangfang Data,and VIP.The bias of risk tool in the Cochrane handbook was used to evaluate the quality of eligible studies.The changes of VAS between preand post-intervention were the main outcome.Meanwhile in view of different VAS values at different stages,the outcomes were categorized into four parts:Week 1,Week 2,Week 3 and Week 4.The results showed that a total of 382 articles were collected,and after checked the full text,8 articles including 10 studies were considered as potential targets.The total risk of bias was identified as unclear risk due to less information on the allocation and selective report.The random effect model was suggested to analyze the pooling results.The comparison between acupuncture and moxibustion performed no statistical difference at Week 1 (MD=0.19,95%CI(-0.13,0.5),P=0.05),Week 2(MD=-0.12,95%CI(-0.91,0.68),P=0.77),Week 4(MD=0.00,95%CI(-0.71,0.07),P=0.99),respectively.Based on the sensitivity analysis,every group performed less difference.It was concluded that due to poor quality of included studies and less information about this area, there were no positive results depending on the comparison between acupuncture and moxibustion.More scientific and normative randomized controlled trials should be reported.

上海市卫计委科研资助项目（20134013）：艾灸治疗溃疡性结肠炎结肠黏膜炎症相关靶基因调控的机理研究，负责人：吴焕淦；科学技术部国家重点基础研究发展计划“973计划”项目（2015CB554501）：艾灸效应的启动机制及其内源性调节作用的机理研究，负责人：吴焕淦。