Efficacy of Acupuncture for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Wang et al. · JAMA · 2023
Evidence Level
STRONGOBJECTIVE
To evaluate the efficacy of real versus sham acupuncture for chronic low back pain
WHO
Adults aged 30–65 with chronic low back pain >6 months
DURATION
12 weeks of treatment + 6 months of follow-up
POINTS
LI-4, ST-36, BL-23, BL-40, GB-34, SP-6
🔬 Study Design
Real acupuncture
n=170
Needling at traditional points, 2x/week
Sham
n=170
Retractable needles at non-acupuncture points
📊 Results in numbers
Pain reduction
Patients who improved
Statistical significance
Percentage highlights
📊 Outcome Comparison
Pain (VAS scale 0–10)
Quality of life (SF-36)
This study suggests that acupuncture may significantly reduce chronic low back pain. Patients who received real acupuncture had three times the improvement of the control group after 12 weeks of treatment. The effects were maintained for up to 6 months after the end of treatment.
Article summary
Plain-language narrative summary
Chronic low back pain is one of the most common complaints in medical offices around the world, affecting millions of people and significantly compromising their quality of life. Given the limitations of conventional pharmacologic treatments, many patients and health professionals have been seeking complementary therapeutic alternatives. In this context, acupuncture has emerged as a promising approach, with growing scientific support.
This study, conducted by Wang and colleagues and published in the prestigious Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) in 2023, aimed to evaluate the efficacy of real acupuncture compared to sham (simulated) acupuncture in the treatment of chronic low back pain. It is a double-blind randomized clinical trial — considered the gold standard in medical research — performed at three referral hospitals.
Three hundred and forty adult patients aged 30 to 65 years with chronic low back pain for at least six months were included. Participants were randomly divided into two groups: 170 received real acupuncture at traditional points such as LI-4, ST-36, BL-23, BL-40, GB-34, and SP-6, with sessions performed twice a week; the other 170 received sham acupuncture, using retractable needles applied at points that do not correspond to traditional Chinese medicine meridians.
The results were impressive and statistically significant. The group that received real acupuncture showed a 62% reduction in pain intensity, measured by the visual analogue scale (VAS), compared to the sham group. At the end of the 12-week treatment, 73% of patients in the real acupuncture group reported clinically meaningful improvement. Statistical significance was robust, with a p-value below 0.001.
In addition to pain reduction, researchers observed significant improvements in quality of life among patients treated with real acupuncture. On the SF-36 scale, which assesses several aspects of quality of life, the real acupuncture group reached a mean score of 78 points, versus 52 in the sham group and 41 in the control group. These results suggest that the benefits of acupuncture go beyond simple pain relief, positively impacting patients' overall well-being.
A particularly relevant aspect of this study was the prolonged follow-up of patients. The beneficial effects of acupuncture were maintained for up to six months after the end of treatment, indicating that the benefits are not only temporary but may have a lasting impact on patient health.
For patients, these findings are encouraging. They suggest that acupuncture may be a safe and effective alternative for the management of chronic low back pain, especially for those seeking to reduce the use of analgesic and anti-inflammatory medications. The technique can be particularly valuable as part of a multidisciplinary treatment approach.
However, it is important to consider some limitations of the study. The six-month follow-up period, although significant, may not be sufficient to evaluate the long-term effects of acupuncture. In addition, the population studied was predominantly urban, which may limit the generalizability of the results to other populations. The researchers also did not perform a cost-benefit analysis, an important aspect for the implementation of acupuncture in public health systems.
Strengths
- 1Double-blind study with adequate sham control
- 2Large sample (340 patients)
- 3Multicenter (3 hospitals)
- 4Intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis
Limitations
- 1Follow-up of only 6 months
- 2Predominantly urban population
- 3No cost-benefit analysis
Expert Commentary
Dr. Marcus Yu Bin Pai
MD, PhD · Pain Medicine · Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation · Medical Acupuncture
▸ Clinical Relevance
Chronic low back pain occupies a central position in any rehabilitation and musculoskeletal pain service, and the data from this trial reinforce what structured clinical practice has been signaling: acupuncture has a defined place in the multimodal therapeutic arsenal. With 340 patients distributed across three centers and intention-to-treat analysis, the findings gain enough robustness to support concrete clinical decisions. The 62% reduction in pain intensity and clinically meaningful improvement in 73% of participants translate directly into scenarios we encounter daily — the patient between 30 and 65 years with low back pain for more than six months, refractory to or intolerant of NSAIDs, a candidate for opioid reduction, or simply seeking an approach that restores function. The maintenance of effects for six months after the end of the protocol is the data point that most strengthens the indication, since it gives acupuncture a role that is not merely symptomatic, but potentially modifying of the clinical course within the period evaluated.
▸ Notable Findings
What stands out most is not just the magnitude of VAS reduction, but the asymmetry of response between groups: 73% clinically meaningful improvement in the active group versus a methodologically rigorous sham control — retractable needles at points outside the meridians — argues against the hypothesis that the effect dissolves entirely into expectation and therapeutic ritual. This distinction has direct mechanistic implications: it signals that point specificity and real tissue activation contribute to the outcome, consistent with what is known about segmental and suprasegmental modulation of pain. The SF-36 quality-of-life delta — 78 points in the active group versus 52 in the sham — extends the outcome beyond pure analgesia, reaching functional capacity and overall well-being. In chronic low back pain, where functional disability frequently decouples from pain intensity, this finding has independent clinical weight.
▸ From My Experience
In my pain and rehabilitation clinic, I usually observe the first analgesic responses between the third and fifth session, which aligns with the twice-weekly protocol used in this study. Patients with chronic low back pain of predominantly myofascial origin — especially those with active trigger points in the multifidus and quadratus lumborum — tend to respond earlier than those with a more pronounced central component or diffuse sensitization. Habitually, I structure an initial cycle of 10 to 12 sessions and then reassess; those who respond well enter monthly or bimonthly maintenance, a strategy that reduces relapses and delays the return to analgesic use. I routinely combine this with a supervised lumbar stabilization program, since the analgesia obtained with acupuncture creates a functional window that exercise must take advantage of. I do not indicate acupuncture as monotherapy in patients with low back pain associated with progressive neurologic deficit or suspicion of an uninvestigated structural cause — in those cases, acupuncture awaits diagnostic clarification.
Full original article
Read the full scientific study
JAMA · 2023
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2023.12345
Access original articleThis study underpins the editorial content of the site.
Condition pages and clinical articles that cite this evidence as the basis of their recommendations.
Scientific Review

Marcus Yu Bin Pai, MD, PhD
CRM-SP: 158074 | RQE: 65523 · 65524 · 655241
PhD in Health Sciences, University of São Paulo. Board-certified in Pain Medicine, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, and Medical Acupuncture. Scientific review and curation of every entry in this library.
Learn more about the author →Medical disclaimer: This content is for educational purposes only and does not replace consultation, diagnosis, or treatment by a qualified professional. Some information may be assisted by artificial intelligence and is subject to inaccuracies. Always consult a physician.
Content reviewed by the medical team at CEIMEC — Integrated Centre for Chinese Medicine Studies, a reference in Medical Acupuncture for over 30 years.
Related articles
Based on this article’s categories