The Efficacy and Safety of Chinese Eye Exercise of Acupoints in Dry Eye Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Authors:
  • PLPavasut Leedasawat
    Pavasut Leedasawat
  • PSParadi Sangvatanakul
    Paradi Sangvatanakul
  • PTParunkul Tungsukruthai
    Parunkul Tungsukruthai
  • CKChuntida Kamalashiran
    Chuntida Kamalashiran
  • PPPratya Phetkate
    Pratya Phetkate
  • PPPromporn Patarajierapun
    Promporn Patarajierapun
Publisher website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Introduction: Dry eye disorder (DED) is a growing global issue linked to excessive digital screen time. Chinese eye exercise of acupoint (CEA), a set of self-massages on shared Chinese acupuncture (CA), has been used to reduce visual-related ocular symptoms and possibly as an alternative treatment for DED. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of CEA. Methods: A single-blind randomized controlled trial was conducted at Thammasat University Hospital in Thailand, recruiting 56 participants aged 20–60 years, equally divided into two groups: the treatment group with CEA and the control group with standard lid hygiene treatment (STD). The intervention program lasted 12 weeks. Main outcome measures: Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI), tear break-up time (TBUT), Schirmer-I test (SIT), corneal surface staining (CSS), and self-recorded forms for safety and adverse effects were measured at baseline, week 4, and week 12. An independent sample t test, paired t test, and repeated measures (ANOVA) were used to compare results between both groups, study visits, and primary and secondary outcome measurements, respectively. The p values <0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results: The characteristics were not statistically different between both groups at the baseline. The mean OSDI scores were significantly reduced in both groups at week 4 and week 12 compared to baseline (p value <0.05). Additionally, both CEA and STD showed significant improvement in TBUT and SIT (p value <0.05). CSS was significantly improved only in the CEA groups (p value <0.05). No significant differences were observed between the study groups, except for SIT at week 12 (p value <0.05). For the safety, there were no adverse side effects in either group. Conclusion: CEA seemed to be as effective as STD in improving the OSDI, TBUT, and SIT of DED without causing any side effects.

This publication has 54 references indexed in Scilit: