...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Traditional Chinese Medical Sciences >Acupoint injection for asthma: Systematic review of randomized controlled trials
【24h】

Acupoint injection for asthma: Systematic review of randomized controlled trials

机译:哮喘的穴位注射:随机对照试验的系统评价

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Objective To assess the effectiveness and safety of acupoint injection for the treatment of asthma. Methods Six electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of acupoint injection for asthma. Two authors extracted data and assessed methodological quality independently using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias tool. Data were evaluated using RevMan v5.2. Results Eighteen RCTs involving 1913 participants with asthma were identified. Overall methodological quality of the RCTs was classified as unclear risk of bias. Western medicine (12 RCTs) was injected most frequently into acupoints, followed by Chinese herbal medicine (four RCTs), vitamins (one RCT), and Chinese herbal medicine combined with Western medicine (one RCT). Four RCTs used only one acupoint [ST36 (two RCTs), BL13, CV22], whereas the other RCTs selected multiple acupoints (among which BL13 was used most frequently). One RCT reported mortality, no RCT reported quality of life, 15 RCTs reported the symptom improvement rate, one RCT reported asthma control test (ACT) data, one RCT reported the duration of asthma, three RCTs reported the mean time that asthma was controlled (MTAC), and 13 RCTs reported lung-function tests (LFTs). Some RCTs showed acupoint injection may improve the attack time of asthma, MTAC, and LFTs. Five RCTs reported the outcome of adverse events and showed no significant differences between the acupoint injection group and control group. Conclusions The findings suggest that acupoint injection may be effective for improving ACT data, duration of asthma, MTAC and LFTs. However, the evidence is insufficient owing to the poor methodological quality of the RCTs.
机译:目的评估穴位注射治疗哮喘的有效性和安全性。方法在六个电子数据库中搜索穴位注射治疗哮喘的随机对照试验(RCT)。两位作者使用Cochrane协作偏见风险工具独立提取数据并评估方法学质量。使用RevMan v5.2评估数据。结果确定了18项RCT,涉及1913名哮喘患者。 RCT的总体方法学质量被归类为不清楚的偏倚风险。穴位注射西药(12个RCT)的频率最高,其次是中草药(4个RCT),维生素(1个RCT)和中草药结合西药(1个RCT)。四个RCT仅使用一个穴位[ST36(两个RCT),BL13,CV22],而其他RCT选择了多个穴位(其中BL13最常使用)。 1个RCT报告了死亡率,没有RCT报告了生活质量,15个RCT报告了症状改善率,1个RCT报告了哮喘控制测试(ACT)数据,1个RCT报告了哮喘的持续时间,3个RCT报告了控制哮喘的平均时间( MTAC)和13个RCT报告了肺功能测试(LFT)。一些RCT显示,穴位注射可以改善哮喘,MTAC和LFT的发作时间。五个RCT报告了不良事件的结果,并且穴位注射组和对照组之间没有显着差异。结论研究结果表明,穴位注射可能有效改善ACT数据,哮喘持续时间,MTAC和LFT。但是,由于随机对照试验的方法学质量较差,因此证据不足。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号