, Maria Imaculada de Lima Montebelo2
, Godofredo Pignataro Neto3
, Maria da Luz Rosário de Sousa4,*
1Anhembi Morumbi University, Piracicaba, São Paulo, Brazil
2Postgraduate Program in Movement Sciences and Administration, Methodist University of Piracicaba, Piracicaba, São Paulo, Brazil
3Salutares Health and Education Center, Araras, São Paulo, Brazil
4Department of Public Health, Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, Piracicaba Dental School, State University of Campinas, Piracicaba, São Paulo, Brazil
©2026 Jaseng Medical Foundation
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/).
Acknowledgments
The authors thank all the participants in the study for their participation and collaboration, the Piracicaba School of Dentistry, Municipality of Piracicaba, the Native Pharmacy of Manipulation and Professors Dr. Konstantin Korotkov and Dimitry Orlov, for their assistance and help with the study.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization: TBA and MLRS. Methodology: TBA, GPN, and MLRS. Formal investigation: TBA and MLRS. Data analysis: MILM. Writing original draft: TBA. Writing – review and editing: TBA and MLRS.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors have no conflict of interests to declare.
Author Use of AI Tools Statement
During the preparation of this manuscript, the authors used Microsoft Copilot for checking formal grammar. All content was subsequently reviewed and revised by the authors, who accept full responsibility for the final version of the work.
Funding
This work was supported by Fundação de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (grant no.: 2019/14913-4).
Ethical Statement
This research was reviewed and approved by the institutional review board of Research Ethics Committee of the Piracicaba School of Dentistry - FOP/Unicamp (no.: 12797119.9.0000.5418) and registered in the Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials (code no.: RBR-72qkvy). Informed consent was obtained from all participants. Participants experiencing residual anxiety were offered active treatment after study completion.
Data Availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
| Characteristics |
Real Acupuncture Group (n = 16) |
Real Phytotherapy Group (n = 16) |
Placebo Phytotherapy roup (n = 16) |
Placebo Acupuncture Group (n = 16) |
p |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age* | 32.00 | 29.06 | 35.76 | 36.19 | 0.287 |
| Sex‡ n (%) | 0.142 | ||||
| Female | 10 (62.5) | 11 (68.7) | 15 (93.7) | 12 (75) | |
| Male | 6 (37.5) | 5 (31.3) | 1 (6.3) | 4 (25) | |
| STAI initial* | |||||
| S-anxiety | 51.61 | 53.31 | 53.18 | 48.06 | < 0.971 |
| T-anxiety | 50.22 | 50.81 | 52.41 | 49.87 | 1.000 |
| VAS initial* | 6.07 | 6.83 | 7.23 | 6.08 | < 0.140 |
| Ryodoraku initial* | 24.56 | 25.00 | 23.06 | 21.56 | 1.000 |
| Bioelectrography* | 50.86 | 50.85 | 51.46 | 53.97 | < 0.174 |
| Characteristics | Real Acupuncture Group (n = 16) |
Real Phytotherapy Group (n = 16) |
Placebo Phytotherapy roup (n = 16) |
Placebo Acupuncture Group (n = 16) |
p |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age |
32.00 | 29.06 | 35.76 | 36.19 | 0.287 |
| Sex |
0.142 | ||||
| Female | 10 (62.5) | 11 (68.7) | 15 (93.7) | 12 (75) | |
| Male | 6 (37.5) | 5 (31.3) | 1 (6.3) | 4 (25) | |
| STAI initial |
|||||
| S-anxiety | 51.61 | 53.31 | 53.18 | 48.06 | < 0.971 |
| T-anxiety | 50.22 | 50.81 | 52.41 | 49.87 | 1.000 |
| VAS initial |
6.07 | 6.83 | 7.23 | 6.08 | < 0.140 |
| Ryodoraku initial |
24.56 | 25.00 | 23.06 | 21.56 | 1.000 |
| Bioelectrography |
50.86 | 50.85 | 51.46 | 53.97 | < 0.174 |
| Group | Before | After | p | CI (95%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Real acupuncture | 6.07* ± 1.66 | 1.74 ‡ ± 1.50 | < 0.0001 | 3.39–5.26 |
| Real phytotherapy | 6.83* ± 1.46 | 2.69‡,§ ± 1.89 | < 0.0001 | 3.15–5.13 |
| Placebo phytotherapy | 7.23* ± 1.23 | 3.82§,|| ± 2.33 | < 0.0001 | 2.45–4.37 |
| Placebo acupuncture | 6.08* ± 1.55 | 5.02|| ± 1.40 | 0.037 | 0.07–2.05 |
| Session | Real Acupuncture Group |
Placebo Acupuncture Group |
Real Phytotherapy Group |
Placebo Phytotherapy Group | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X | p | X | p | X | p | X | p | |
| 1 | 6.07 | - | 6.08 | - | 6.83 | - | 7.23 | - |
| 2 | 5.19 | 0.914 | 6.08 | 1.000 | 5.23 | 0.043 | 5.88 | 0.117 |
| 3 | 3.57 | < 0.001 | 5.55 | 1.000 | 3.95 | < 0.001 | 5.69 | 0.044 |
| 4 | 3.86 | 0.001 | 5.92 | 1.000 | 4.68 | 0.003 | 5.52 | 0.025 |
| 5 | 3.66 | < 0.001 | 5.24 | 1.000 | 4.32 | < 0.001 | 4.64 | < 0.001 |
| Group | S-Anxiety X |
p | CI (95%) | T-Anxiety X |
p | CI (95%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Real acupuncture | 15.28 | < 0.0001 | 10.55–20.00 | 10.72 | < 0.0001 | 6.78–14.66 |
| Real phytotherapy | 10.69 | < 0.0001 | 5.67–15.70 | 6.56 | 0.003 | 2.38–10.74 |
| Placebo phytotherapy | 9.29 | < 0.0001 | 4.43–12.16 | 8.18 | < 0.0001 | 4.12–12.23 |
| Placebo acupuncture | 7.25 | 0.005 | 2.24–12.26 | 4.06 | 0.57 | −0.12–8.24 |
| Group | Before | After | p | CI (95%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Real acupuncture | 24.56 ± 10.84 | 18.06 ± 8.31 | 0.001 | 2.92–10.08 |
| Real phytotherapy | 25.00 ± 13.13 | 17.69 ± 8.62 | < 0.001 | 3.51–11.11 |
| Placebo phytotherapy | 23.06 ± 9.69 | 12.65 ± 5.74 | < 0.001 | 6.73–14.10 |
| Placebo acupuncture | 21.56 ± 7.55 | 10.69 ± 6.32 | < 0.001 | 7.08–14.67 |
ANOVA test. Proportion test. STAI = state-trait anxiety inventory; VAS = visual analogue scale.
Different symbols (*, ‡) in horizontal (line) indicated statistically significant difference within the Group / Different symbols (§, ||) in vertical (column) indicated a statistically significant difference between Groups / ANOVA. CI(95%) = confidence interval / VAS: Visual Analogue Scale.
VAS = visual analogue scale.
STAI = state-trait anxiety inventory.
CI (95%) = confidence interval /