Abstract
BACKGROUND: Asthma is a chronic airway inflammatory disease that significantly affects patients' quality of life and mental health. This study aims to compare the differences between acupoint embedding auxiliary therapy and traditional auxiliary therapy in asthma control, immune response, sleep quality, and quality of life, as well as evaluate their therapeutic effects on patients with asthma. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 300 patients with asthma was conducted, divided into acupoint catgut embedding and conventional treatment groups. Key assessments included asthma control (ACQ score), exacerbation frequency, HADS, PSQI, and SF-36 for quality of life. Immune markers (IgE, eosinophil count, IL-4, IL-5, IL-10) were measured. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses and ROC curves were used to identify predictors of asthma control and sleep quality. Stratified analysis evaluated differences by asthma severity. RESULTS: The acupoint catgut embedding group showed significant improvements in asthma control (p < 0.001), exacerbation frequency (p < 0.05), and anxiety and depression (p = 0.0359) compared to the conventional treatment group. IgE (p = 0.00656), eosinophil count (p = 0.0214), and IL-5 (p = 0.0187) were significantly lower, while IL-10 (p = 0.0226) was higher in the acupoint group. Sleep quality (PSQI score, p = 0.0117) and deep sleep (NREM 3, p < 0.05) improved. Asthma severity (p < 0.001) and treatment method (p < 0.001) were significant predictors of outcomes, with model 2 (AUC = 0.731) outperforming model 1 (AUC = 0.649). Stratified analysis showed acupoint therapy was more effective in intermittent and mild asthma. CONCLUSION: As an auxiliary treatment, acupoint embedding therapy has shown a good effect in improving the sleep quality of patients with asthma and controlling asthma symptoms, especially in patients with mild-to-moderate asthma.