WET CUPPING VS DRY CUPPING
Wet Cupping vs Dry Cupping: What Is the Difference?
Wet cupping and dry cupping both use suction, but they differ in technique, skin involvement and treatment approach. This guide explains the key differences, potential uses, safety considerations and how each method is typically performed.
In short:
Wet cupping and dry cupping both use suction, but they are performed differently. Dry cupping uses suction only, while wet cupping combines suction with small superficial skin incisions and a brief second cupping stage. The choice between them depends on the treatment goal, individual suitability and practitioner assessment.
Table of Contents
07
What Does the Research Say?
10
11
What Is the Difference Between Wet Cupping and Dry Cupping?
Dry cupping uses suction only, without skin incisions or blood removal. Wet cupping, commonly associated with Hijama, combines suction with small superficial skin incisions followed by a brief second cupping stage.
The choice between the two methods depends on treatment goals, individual suitability and practitioner assessment.
How Are Wet Cupping and Dry Cupping Performed?
Dry Cupping
- Controlled suction is applied using cups.
- No skin incisions are made.
- No blood is removed.
- The cups remain in place for a limited period before removal.
Wet Cupping
- An initial cupping stage is performed.
- Small superficial skin incisions are made.
- The cups are briefly reapplied.
- The area is cleaned and appropriate aftercare is provided.
Wet Cupping vs Dry Cupping: Key Differences
Wet and dry cupping share the use of controlled suction, but they differ in technique, skin involvement, aftercare and suitability.
| Feature | Dry Cupping | Wet Cupping |
|---|---|---|
| Suction | Yes | Yes |
| Skin incisions | No | Small superficial incisions |
| Blood removal | No | A small amount may be collected |
| Invasiveness | Non-invasive | Minimally invasive |
| Typical use | Muscle relaxation, recovery and some pain-related complaints | Hijama, pain-related complaints and traditional practice |
| Aftercare | Usually minimal | More attention to skin care and hygiene |
| Skin marks | Circular marks may occur | Circular marks plus small superficial incision sites |
| Hygiene requirements | Clean equipment and appropriate skin hygiene | Sterile single-use equipment and stricter infection-control procedures |
| Suitability | Depends on individual assessment | Depends on individual assessment and additional medical considerations |
Key Point
Dry cupping is generally simpler and non-invasive, while wet cupping involves additional skin procedures and therefore requires stricter hygiene and aftercare.
Potential Benefits of Wet Cupping and Dry Cupping
Both methods may offer supportive benefits, but they are often chosen for different treatment goals and individual needs.
Potential Benefits of Dry Cupping
- May support muscle relaxation and reduced tension.
- May help with some pain-related complaints.
- May be used as part of physical recovery and wellness routines.
Potential Benefits of Wet Cupping
- May support pain management in selected individuals.
- Is commonly used within traditional Hijama practice.
- May be chosen for broader wellbeing goals in suitable individuals.
The potential benefits of both methods vary between individuals, and neither technique should be presented as a guaranteed treatment or cure.
Which Cupping Method May Be More Suitable?
The choice between wet cupping and dry cupping depends on the treatment goal, individual health status, skin condition, tolerance and practitioner assessment.
Dry Cupping May Be Considered When:
- A non-invasive cupping method is preferred.
- The goal is muscle relaxation or physical recovery.
- Skin incisions are not appropriate or desired.
- A simpler aftercare process is preferred.
Wet Cupping May Be Considered When:
- Hijama is specifically requested or preferred.
- The individual is suitable for a minimally invasive procedure.
- Traditional Hijama practice is part of the treatment goal.
- Appropriate hygiene, infection control and aftercare can be provided.
Important
Neither wet cupping nor dry cupping is automatically “better.” The appropriate method depends on individual assessment, treatment goals and clinical suitability.
Safety, Side Effects and Aftercare
Both wet cupping and dry cupping can cause temporary skin changes, but wet cupping requires additional precautions because the skin is intentionally opened during the procedure.
Dry CuppingDry cupping may leave temporary circular marks, mild tenderness or skin sensitivity. Strong suction or prolonged application may increase the chance of irritation or blistering. Because the skin remains intact, aftercare is usually simpler.
Wet CuppingWet cupping may also cause temporary marks and tenderness, in addition to small superficial incision sites. Appropriate hygiene, sterile single-use equipment, infection-control procedures and careful aftercare are therefore especially important.
AftercareAfter either method, the treated area should be kept clean and monitored for unusual or persistent symptoms. After wet cupping, additional attention should be given to the incision sites until the skin has healed.
Safety Note
Suitability should be assessed individually. Active skin infection, open wounds, bleeding disorders, certain medications and some medical conditions may require extra caution or make cupping unsuitable.
Read the full Hijama Safety & Contraindications guide →
What Does the Research Say About Wet vs Dry Cupping?
Research has examined both wet and dry cupping for pain and musculoskeletal conditions, but the evidence is not equally strong for each method. Some studies suggest potential benefits, while others report little or no advantage compared with placebo or standard care. PubMed
A 2022 systematic review that analysed wet and dry cupping separately for low back pain found that wet cupping showed clearer reductions in pain intensity, while dry cupping did not show a statistically significant reduction in pain in that analysis. However, the studies were highly heterogeneous, meaning treatment protocols varied considerably and the findings should be interpreted cautiously. PubMed
For dry cupping specifically, a 2026 systematic review comparing it with placebo cupping concluded that the effects on musculoskeletal pain remain very uncertain because the certainty of evidence was very low and most included trials had a high risk of bias. PubMed
Wet cupping has also been reviewed separately. Earlier systematic-review evidence reported promising findings for some musculoskeletal pain conditions, but the included trials had methodological limitations and stronger studies were still needed. PubMed
Evidence Note
Current research does not establish that one cupping method is universally better than the other. Results depend on the condition studied, treatment protocol and quality of the available evidence.
Summary: Wet Cupping vs Dry Cupping
Wet cupping and dry cupping both use controlled suction, but they differ in technique. Dry cupping uses suction only, while wet cupping combines suction with small superficial skin incisions and a brief second cupping stage.
Dry cupping is generally non-invasive and may be chosen for muscle relaxation, recovery and some pain-related complaints. Wet cupping, commonly associated with Hijama, involves additional skin procedures and therefore requires stricter hygiene, infection control and aftercare.
Neither method is automatically better for everyone. The most suitable approach depends on the treatment goal, individual health status, skin condition, personal preference and practitioner assessment.
Current research suggests potential benefits for both methods in selected situations, but the quality and consistency of evidence remain variable. More high-quality studies are needed before firm conclusions can be made about which method is superior for specific conditions.
Key Takeaway
Dry cupping uses suction only, while wet cupping includes superficial skin incisions. The choice between them should be based on individual suitability and treatment goals rather than assuming one method is always better.
SCIENTIFIC REFERENCES
References
01
Effectiveness of self-management of dry and wet cupping therapy for low back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Medicine (Baltimore). 2022;101(51):e32325.
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000032325
PMID: 36595746
This review analysed wet and dry cupping separately for low back pain. Wet cupping showed clearer reductions in pain intensity, while dry cupping did not show a significant reduction in pain in that analysis. The studies were highly heterogeneous, so the findings should be interpreted cautiously. PubMed
02
Jenkins LC, Verhagen AP, Amorim M, et al.
The Efficacy of Dry Cupping Compared to Placebo Cupping for People With Musculoskeletal Complaints: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis.
JOSPT Open. 2026;4(1):23–35.
DOI: 10.2519/josptopen.2025.0159
PMID: 42686168
This review found that the effects of dry cupping on musculoskeletal pain remain very uncertain because the certainty of evidence was very low and most included trials had a high risk of bias. PubMed
03
Wood S, Fryer G, Tan LLF, Cleary C.
Dry cupping for musculoskeletal pain and range of motion: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2020;24(4):503–518.
PMID: 33218554
The review reported possible benefits of dry cupping for pain and function in some musculoskeletal conditions, but the overall evidence was low to moderate in quality and firm conclusions could not be made. PubMed
04
Al-Bedah AMN, Elsubai IS, Qureshi NA, et al.
Evaluation of Wet Cupping Therapy: Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical Trials.
J Altern Complement Med. 2016.
PMID: 27557333
The review reported promising findings for wet cupping in some musculoskeletal pain conditions, but the included trials had methodological limitations and variable risk of bias. PubMed
05
Zhang Z, Pasapula M, Wang Z, Edwards K, Norrish A.
The effectiveness of cupping therapy on low back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials.
Complement Ther Med. 2024;80:103013.
PMID: 38184285
This review found short-term pain improvements with cupping overall. Wet cupping showed a significant effect at the end of treatment, while dry cupping did not in the subgroup analysis; however, the authors did not find evidence that pain reduction was statistically associated with cupping type. PubMed
Written by
Dr Amr Salama, DPT
DPT, Cairo University • Licensed Physiotherapist in Dubai • MOHAP-Licensed Hijama Practitioner
Dr Amr Salama writes and reviews evidence-informed educational content on Hijama, cupping therapy, rehabilitation and related health topics.
Last reviewed
October 2026
EXPLORE MORE
Related Hijama Guides
What Is Hijama?
Learn how wet cupping therapy works and what happens during a typical session.
READ GUIDE →
Hijama Benefits
Explore the potential benefits of Hijama and what current research suggests.
READ GUIDE →
Dry Cupping
Learn how dry cupping works, its potential benefits and safety considerations.
READ GUIDE →
Hijama Safety & Contraindications
– Understand when Hijama may require extra caution or may not be suitable.
READ GUIDE →