Trial · NCT06977932
The Alternative Effects of Electroacupuncture in the Treatment of Trigeminal Neuralgia
NCT06977932, Not applicable, Not yet recruiting, Yuanyuan Wu
3 sourcestrials-2026-11-12-0.5.0
Cite this record
ConductScience Library. The Alternative Effects of Electroacupuncture in the Treatment of Trigeminal Neuralgia. Trials, record NCT06977932. Release trials-2026-11-12-0.5.0, 12 Nov 2026. https://conductscience.org/library/trials/NCT06977932
On this page
Trial
As registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, in the graph's capture of the registry.
- Title
- The Alternative Effects of Electroacupuncture in the Treatment of Trigeminal Neuralgia
- NCT number
- NCT06977932
- Status
- Not yet recruiting
- Phases
- Not applicable
- Enrollment
- 126 participants, estimated
- Lead sponsor
- Yuanyuan Wu
- Conditions
- Trigeminal Neuralgia
- Interventions
- Carbarmazepine, Sham Electroacupuncture, Carbarmazepine Placebo, Electroacupuncture
- First posted
- 2025-05-18
- Last updated
- 2026-03-05
Source ClinicalTrials.gov
Registered outcomes14
Each outcome the trial registered, primary first, in ClinicalTrials.gov's words.
| List | Outcome | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | VAS Response Rate | Baseline, the end of the 2-week treatment. | The proportion of patients with a reduction in VAS score of ≥50% from baseline at the end of the 2-week treatment.The VAS measures pain intensity on a scale from 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate worse pain. The unit of measure is "Percentage of participants". |
| Secondary | Changes in Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores | At baseline, and at the end of weeks 2, 4, and 8. | Changes in VAS scores from baseline at weeks 2, 4, and 8.The VAS scale ranges from 0 to 10. Higher scores indicate more severe pain. The unit of measure is "Units on a scale". |
| Secondary | Total Days of Rescue Medication Use Assessed by Pain Diary | Daily from baseline through the end of week 8. | Patients will record any use of non-study pain relief medications (rescue analgesia) in their daily pain diary. While the specific type and dosage of the medications are documented in the diary for safety and protocol monitoring, this specific outcome measure evaluates the cumulative total number of days a patient required rescue medication during the entire observation period. A lower number indicates less reliance on additional analgesics. The unit of measure is "Days". |
| Secondary | Average Daily Frequency of Pain Episodes Assessed by Pain Diary | Daily from baseline through the end of week 8. | Patients will record the number of spontaneous and triggered paroxysmal pain episodes daily using a 24-hour pain diary. To capture the continuous trajectory of pain over the entire study period, the daily data will be aggregated and reported as weekly averages. The unit of measure is "Episodes per day". |
| Secondary | Average Daily Pain Intensity Assessed by Pain Diary | Daily from baseline through the end of week 8. | Patients will rate their average pain intensity over the past 24 hours daily using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) within the pain diary. The VAS ranges from 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate more severe pain. To capture the continuous trajectory, the daily scores will be aggregated and reported as weekly averages. The unit of measure is "Units on a scale". |
| Secondary | Highest Daily Pain Intensity Assessed by Pain Diary | Daily from baseline through the end of week 8. | Patients will rate their peak pain intensity over the past 24 hours daily using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) within the pain diary. The VAS ranges from 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate worse pain. To capture the continuous trajectory, the daily scores will be aggregated and reported as weekly averages. The unit of measure is "Units on a scale". |
| Secondary | Changes in the Patient global impression of change （PGIC） | At the end of weeks 2, 4, and 8. | The Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) scale is a patient-reported outcome measure used to dynamically monitor the trajectory of health status. This scale employs a seven-point Likert scale (1=very much worse to 7=very much better) to assess the impact of therapeutic interventions on an individual's functional status. Treatment efficacy is categorized into three levels: ① disease progression (scores 0-3) indicates a worsening of symptoms; ② functional stability (score 4) suggests no significant change in symptoms; and ③ clinical improvement (scores 5-7) represents a marked reduction in symptoms. This subjective assessment tool, through longitudinal comparison with baseline data, provides a direct reflection of the patient's perceived treatment benefit. The unit of measure is "Units on a scale". |
| Secondary | Changes in the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire （SF-MPQ） | At baseline, and at the end of weeks 2, 4, and 8. | The Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ) innovatively integrates qualitative and quantitative analyses of neuropathic pain. This involves: (1) Pain quality assessment: Utilizing 11 sensory descriptors (e.g., pricking, burning) and 4 affective descriptors (e.g., annoying, fearful), a 0-3 intensity rating system is established, synthesizing a Pain Rating Index (PRI = sensory score + affective score); (2) Pain intensity assessment: Employing a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and the Present Pain Intensity index (PPI) for supplementary quantification. This scale significantly enhances clinical applicability while maintaining assessment validity, and has become a gold standard for neuropathic pain assessment. The Pain Rating Index (PRI) is calculated from the descriptors. The total PRI score ranges from 0 to 45. Higher total scores indicate worse neuropathic pain. The unit of measure is "Units on a scale". |
| Secondary | Changes in the Brief pain inventory-facial scale （BPI-Facial） | At baseline, and at the end of weeks 2, 4, and 8. | The Brief Pain Inventory-Facial Scale (BPI-Facial) is designed to establish a three-dimensional assessment system: ① Pain intensity dimension (4 items) quantifies the frequency and severity of pain; ② Daily function dimension (7 items) assesses the impact of pain on basic life activities (including specific emotional states); ③ Facial function dimension (7 items) detects the degree of limitation in specific facial activities. Eighteen standardized items, measured from multiple perspectives, can systematically evaluate pain-related physiological, psychological, and social functional changes, providing multidimensional data support for efficacy determination. Each item is rated on a numerical scale from 0 to 10, yielding a total score that ranges from 0 to 180, where higher scores indicate more severe pain and greater functional impairment. The unit of measure is "Units on a scale". |
| Secondary | Changes in The Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) | At baseline, and at the end of weeks 2, 4, and 8. | In assessing anxiety via the Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS), scoring yields two key metrics: the raw sum score (X) and the derived standard score (Y). The latter is calculated as the integer portion of 1.25X, with truncation applied. Per Chinese norms, a standard score (Y) of 50 serves as the threshold for clinical anxiety, with severity stratified as mild (50-59), moderate (60-69), or severe (≥70). The standard score ranges from 25 to 100. Higher scores represent more severe anxiety. The unit of measure is "Units on a scale". |
1 to 10 of 14Source ClinicalTrials.gov
See all 14 registered outcomesOutcomes0
Each outcome the trial posted results for, in ClinicalTrials.gov's words.
None in this release.
Results by group0
Each measurement the trial posted, group by group, in the words and numbers it posted.
None in this release.
Participant flow0
How many started, completed or left each group, period by period.
None in this release.
Adverse events0
Each adverse event the trial posted, group by group: the participants affected out of those at risk.
None in this release.
Adverse event totals0
The totals the trial posted for each group.
None in this release.
Papers1
The papers the trial lists on ClinicalTrials.gov.
| PMID | Listed as |
|---|---|
| 42261299 | DERIVED |
Source PubMed
Grants0
The grants NIH RePORTER links to the trial, newest funded first: NIH's, and some of AHRQ's, CDC's, FDA's and VA's. Each shows its title, principal investigators, organization and funder in its newest year.
None in this release.
Trial comparisons0
Comparisons of the trial's two groups, calculated by ConductScience from the counts it posted.
None in this release.
Tests0
The ConductCognition tests this trial's registered outcomes name, as ScienceGraph matched them in trial-tests-2026-11-12-0.2.1.
None in this release.
Data dates
The day each source was copied for this release.
Sources 3
- ClinicalTrials.gov's posted results, through CTTI's AACTFreely available. Acknowledgement requested
- ClinicalTrials.govNo license stated
- NIH RePORTER's clinical studies and project filesPublic domain
Each source's terms
- ClinicalTrials.gov's posted results, through CTTI's AACTClinicalTrials.gov data via Aggregate Analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov (AACT), CTTI. CTTI makes its materials freely available and requests acknowledgement. https://aact.ctti-clinicaltrials.org/documentation/299
- ClinicalTrials.govnone stated
- NIH RePORTER's clinical studies and project filesPublic domain (NIH RePORTER)
ClinicalTrials.gov's data carry an international copyright outside the United States: https://clinicaltrials.gov/about-site/terms-conditions.
For software
Read this trial from software.
The record and each of its lists are JSON, twenty rows a page. No key.
GET https://conductscience.org/api/trials/v1/NCT06977932
GET https://conductscience.org/api/trials/v1/NCT06977932/registered