page_title: German acupuncture trials
section_title: Overview and results
hierarchical_section_title: German acupuncture trials / Overview and results
caption_attribution_description: English: Ruhr University Bochum, Main Lecture Hall (Audimax)
context_page_description: The German acupuncture trials were a series of nationwide acupuncture trials set up in 2001 and published in 2006 on behalf of several German statutory health insurance companies because of a dispute as to the usefulness of acupuncture. They consisted of one observational study on acupuncture side effects, and four randomized controlled trials investigating acupuncture treatment for low back pain, knee osteoarthritis, migraine prophylaxis, and tension-type headache. The trials are considered to be one of the largest clinical studies in the field of acupuncture.
  As a result of the GERAC trials, the German Federal Joint Committee ruled in April 2006 that the costs of acupuncture treatment for chronic back pain and knee osteoarthritis would be covered by public health insurers in Germany, though no coverage was offered for headache or migraine. However, because of the outcome of these trials, in the case of the other conditions, insurance corporations in Germany were not convinced that acupuncture had adequate benefits over usual care or sham treatments. No significant differences between acupuncture and sham acupuncture were found in any trial.
context_section_description: Beginning in 2001, the trials were carried out by Heidelberg University, the University of Marburg, the University of Mainz and the Ruhr University Bochum for low back pain, knee osteoarthritis, migraine prophylaxis, and tension-type headache. Apart from that, an observational study on adverse events of acupuncture was done.
  The RCTs were designed as three-armed trials, with the three parallel groups in each trial receiving either verum (real) acupuncture treatment, sham acupuncture treatment, or guideline-based conventional treatment. The number of patients randomized was one of the largest ever for acupuncture trials. For each indication, around 1000 test subjects were included. The trials were conducted using sham acupuncture. No significant differences between acupuncture and sham acupuncture were found in any trial.
  In 2005, the Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift (German Medical Weekly) published an article which criticized the trials for "not meeting scientific criteria". In 2006, Edzard Ernst, a professor of complementary medicine at the University of Exeter, noted that the studies had attracted criticism for not taking into account the risk of patient de-blinding, and that they "[failed] to conclusively answer the question whether acupuncture helps patients through a specific or a nonspecific effect". In September 2007, NHS Choices commented on the news surrounding the study and said that "this trial seems to support the role of acupuncture as an effective alternative therapy for chronic lower back pain" but that "it will be important to try to tease apart the real treatment effects from those that occur through the placebo effect". Highlighting the results of the placebo group, researchers refused to accept a placebo therapy as efficient.
caption: The Ruhr University Bochum
exif: {}