Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To provide an in-depth analysis of seven well-reported studies that examined electrodermal activity (EDA) at acupuncture points with regard to three commonly held tenets of acupuncture: (1) EDA at pathology-related acupuncture points is distinguishable from non-pathology-related acupuncture points; (2) EDA at acupuncture points can assist in diagnosing and monitoring therapeutic progress; and (3) EDA at acupuncture points is able to identify substances that are either therapeutically beneficial or toxic to an individual.
METHODS: Seven of 29 studies that scored>50% on their quality of reporting 54 essential technical and clinical details of EDA testing in human patients were identified from a previous literature review. Fourteen categories of data were extracted from these seven studies for further discussion.
RESULTS: Two studies compared EDA at pathology-related auricular acupuncture points to non-pathology-related sites. Two studies correlated EDA measurements at sites other than auricular acupuncture points with the presence of specific medical conditions. The final three studies assessed changes in EDA at acupuncture points on the fingers and toes when different substances were placed in the electrical circuit with the patient.
CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights the heterogeneity of approaches to EDA assessments and the discrepancies between common clinical practice and the scientific evidence to support that practice. It also provides pilot data that suggest EDA testing at auricular acupuncture points may distinguish pathology-related acupuncture points from non-pathology-related points; decreased skin conductance correlates with tiredness or low energy; and EDA testing at the Jing-Well acupuncture points, on the tips of the fingers and toes, may assist in monitoring effectiveness of acupuncture treatment. The evidence does not support the use of VEGA testing for allergic status.