Question

求翻译：中医文献英文摘要

JAMA. 2005 May 4;293(17):2118-25.
Acupuncture for patients with migraine: a randomized controlled trial.
Linde K1, Streng A, Jürgens S, Hoppe A, Brinkhaus B, Witt C, Wagenpfeil S, Pfaffenrath V, Hammes MG, Weidenhammer W, Willich SN, Melchart D.
Author information
Abstract
CONTEXT:
Acupuncture is widely used to prevent migraine attacks, but the available evidence of its benefit is scarce.
OBJECTIVE:
To investigate the effectiveness of acupuncture compared with sham acupuncture and with no acupuncture in patients with migraine.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS:
Three-group, randomized, controlled trial (April 2002-January 2003) involving 302 patients (88% women), mean (SD) age of 43 (11) years, with migraine headaches, based on International Headache Society criteria. Patients were treated at 18 outpatient centers in Germany.
INTERVENTIONS:
Acupuncture, sham acupuncture, or waiting list control. Acupuncture and sham acupuncture were administered by specialized physicians and consisted of 12 sessions per patient over 8 weeks. Patients completed headache diaries from 4 weeks before to 12 weeks after randomization and from week 21 to 24 after randomization.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:
Difference in headache days of moderate or severe intensity between the 4 weeks before and weeks 9 to 12 after randomization.
RESULTS:
Between baseline and weeks 9 to 12, the mean (SD) number of days with headache of moderate or severe intensity decreased by 2.2 (2.7) days from a baseline of 5.2 (2.5) days in the acupuncture group compared with a decrease to 2.2 (2.7) days from a baseline of 5.0 (2.4) days in the sham acupuncture group, and by 0.8 (2.0) days from a baseline if 5.4 (3.0) days in the waiting list group. No difference was detected between the acupuncture and the sham acupuncture groups (0.0 days, 95% confidence interval, -0.7 to 0.7 days; P = .96) while there was a difference between the acupuncture group compared with the waiting list group (1.4 days; 95% confidence interval; 0.8-2.1 days; P<.001). The proportion of responders (reduction in headache days by at least 50%) was 51% in the acupuncture group, 53% in the sham acupuncture group, and 15% in the waiting list group.
CONCLUSION:
Acupuncture was no more effective than sham acupuncture in reducing migraine headaches although both interventions were more effective than a waiting list control.
答案满意可再送财富值，谢谢

Answer 1

JAMA. 2005 May 4;293(17):2118-25.
Acupuncture for patients with migraine: a randomized controlled trial.
Linde K1, Streng A, Jürgens S, Hoppe A, Brinkhaus B, Witt C, Wagenpfeil S, Pfaffenrath V, Hammes MG, Weidenhammer W, Willich SN, Melchart D.
Author information
Abstract
CONTEXT:
Acupuncture is widely used to prevent migraine attacks, but the available evidence of its benefit is scarce.
OBJECTIVE:
To investigate the effectiveness of acupuncture compared with sham acupuncture and with no acupuncture in patients with migraine.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS:
Three-group, randomized, controlled trial (April 2002-January 2003) involving 302 patients (88% women), mean (SD) age of 43 (11) years, with migraine headaches, based on International Headache Society criteria. Patients were treated at 18 outpatient centers in Germany.
INTERVENTIONS:
Acupuncture, sham acupuncture, or waiting list control. Acupuncture and sham acupuncture were administered by specialized physicians and consisted of 12 sessions per patient over 8 weeks. Patients completed headache diaries from 4 weeks before to 12 weeks after randomization and from week 21 to 24 after randomization.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:
Difference in headache days of moderate or severe intensity between the 4 weeks before and weeks 9 to 12 after randomization.
RESULTS:
Between baseline and weeks 9 to 12, the mean (SD) number of days with headache of moderate or severe intensity decreased by 2.2 (2.7) days from a baseline of 5.2 (2.5) days in the acupuncture group compared with a decrease to 2.2 (2.7) days from a baseline of 5.0 (2.4) days in the sham acupuncture group, and by 0.8 (2.0) days from a baseline if 5.4 (3.0) days in the waiting list group. No difference was detected between the acupuncture and the sham acupuncture groups (0.0 days, 95% confidence interval, -0.7 to 0.7 days; P = .96) while there was a difference between the acupuncture group compared with the waiting list group (1.4 days; 95% confidence interval; 0.8-2.1 days; P<.001). The proportion of responders (reduction in headache days by at least 50%) was 51% in the acupuncture group, 53% in the sham acupuncture group, and 15% in the waiting list group.
CONCLUSION:
Acupuncture was no more effective than sham acupuncture in reducing migraine headaches although both interventions were more effective than a waiting list control.
JAMA。 2005 May 4; 293（17）：2118-25。
针灸患者偏头痛：一项随机对照试验。
Linde K1，Streng A，JürgensS，Hoppe A，Brinkhaus B，Witt C，Wagenpfeil S，Pfaffenrath V，Hammes MG，Weidenhammer W，Willich SN，Melchart D.
作者信息
抽象
上下文：
针灸被广泛用于预防偏头痛发作，但现有的证据证明其益处很少。
目的：
探讨针灸与假针灸比较，无针灸治疗偏头痛患者的疗效。
设计，设置和患者：
三组，随机，对照试验（2002年4月 - 2003年1月），涉及302名患者（88％的妇女），平均（SD）年龄为43（11）岁，患有偏头痛，基于国际头痛学会标准。患者在德国18个门诊中心接受治疗。
干预：
针灸，假针灸或等候名单控制。针灸和假针灸由专业医师管理，每个患者在8周内共12次。患者在随机化后4周前至12周以及随机化后第21至24周完成头痛日记。
主要成果：
随机化后4周前和9-12天之间的中度或重度强度的头痛天的差异。
结果：
在基线和第9至12周之间，中度或重度强度的头痛的平均（SD）天数自针灸组的基线5.2（2.5）天减少2.2（2.7）天，相比之下降至2.2 2.7）天，假手术组为5.4（3.0）天，基线为0.8（2.0）天。针刺组和假针刺组之间无差异（0.0天，95％置信区间，-0.7〜0.7天; P = 0.96），而针灸组与等候组比较差异有统计学意义; 95％置信区间; 0.8-2.1天; P <0.001）。针刺组中应答者的比例（头痛天减少至少50％）在针灸组为51％，假针灸组为53％，等待名单组为15％。
结论：
针灸在减轻偏头痛方面没有比假针灸更有效，尽管两种干预措施比等待名单控制更有效。

Answer 2

《美国医学协会杂志》上。2005年5月4日,293(17):2118 - 25所示。
针灸治疗偏头痛患者:一项随机对照试验。
林德K1,施特伦,更加与众不同,霍普,Brinkhaus B,C威特,Wagenpfeil年代,Pfaffenrath V,哈姆MG,Weidenhammer W,Willich SN,Melchart D。
作者信息
文摘
背景:
针刺疗法被广泛用于预防偏头痛发作,但现有证据的好处是稀缺。
摘要目的:
探讨针灸的有效性与假针灸和没有针灸治疗偏头痛患者。
设计,设置,和病人:
三组,随机,对照试验(2002年4月- 2003年1月),包括302名患者(88%的女性),意味着(SD)(11)43岁,偏头痛,基于国际头痛协会标准。18岁患者治疗门诊中心在德国。
干预措施:
针灸,针灸,或者等待列表控件。针灸,针灸是由专业医生和由12届每个病人超过8周。患者头痛日记完成前4周后12周随机化和随机化后一周21到24。
主要结果测量:
中度或重度头痛天强度差异前4周与周之间的随机化后9到12。
结果:
基线和周9到12之间,平均(SD)的天数与中度或严重的头痛强度下降了2.2(2.7)天从基线的5.2(2.5)天针灸组相比减少2.2(2.7)天从基线的5.0(2.4)天假针灸组,0.8(2.0)天从一个基线如果5.4(3.0)天在等候名单上。检测中没有发现区别针灸与假针灸组(0.0天,95%置信区间,-0.7至0.7天;P = .96点)时是有区别的针灸组与等待名单组(1.4天;95%置信区间,0.8 - -2.1天;P <措施)。反应者的比例(减少头痛天至少50%)针灸组51%,假针灸组53%,15%在等待列表中。
结论:
针灸比没有针灸更有效减少偏头痛，虽然比等待名单控制干预措施更有效。