Linde K, ter Riet G, Hondras M, Vickers A, Saller R, Melchart D
Centre for Complementary Medicine Research, Department of Internal Medicine II, Technische Universität, München, Kaiserstr 9, 80801 München, Germany.
BMC Complement Altern Med. 2001;1:5. doi: 10.1186/1472-6882-1-5. Epub 2001 Jul 20.
Complementary therapies are widespread but controversial. We aim to provide a comprehensive collection and a summary of systematic reviews of clinical trials in three major complementary therapies (acupuncture, herbal medicine, homeopathy). This article is dealing with herbal medicine. Potentially relevant reviews were searched through the register of the Cochrane Complementary Medicine Field, the Cochrane Library, Medline, and bibliographies of articles and books. To be included articles had to review prospective clinical trials of herbal medicines; had to describe review methods explicitly; had to be published; and had to focus on treatment effects. Information on conditions, interventions, methods, results and conclusions was extracted using a pre-tested form and summarized descriptively.
From a total of 79 potentially relevant reviews pre-selected in the screening process 58 met the inclusion criteria. Thirty of the reports reviewed ginkgo (for dementia, intermittent claudication, tinnitus, and macular degeneration), hypericum (for depression) or garlic preparations (for cardiovascular risk factors and lower limb atherosclerosis). The quality of primary studies was criticized in the majority of the reviews. Most reviews judged the available evidence as promising but definitive conclusions were rarely possible.
Systematic reviews are available on a broad range of herbal preparations prescribed for defined conditions. There is very little evidence on the effectiveness of herbalism as practised by specialist herbalists who combine herbs and use unconventional diagnosis.
补充疗法应用广泛但存在争议。我们旨在全面收集并总结针对三种主要补充疗法（针灸、草药、顺势疗法）的临床试验系统评价。本文涉及草药疗法。通过Cochrane补充医学领域注册库、Cochrane图书馆、Medline以及文章和书籍的参考文献搜索潜在相关评价。纳入的文章必须是对草药前瞻性临床试验的评价；必须明确描述评价方法；必须已发表；且必须聚焦于治疗效果。使用预先测试的表格提取有关病症、干预措施、方法、结果和结论的信息，并进行描述性总结。
在筛选过程中预先选择的总共79篇潜在相关评价中，58篇符合纳入标准。其中30篇报告评价了银杏（用于治疗痴呆、间歇性跛行、耳鸣和黄斑变性）、金丝桃（用于治疗抑郁症）或大蒜制剂（用于治疗心血管危险因素和下肢动脉粥样硬化）。大多数评价批评了原始研究的质量。大多数评价认为现有证据有前景，但很少能得出确定性结论。
对于针对特定病症开具的多种草药制剂，已有系统评价。对于专业草药师将草药组合并采用非常规诊断方法所实施的草药疗法的有效性，几乎没有证据。
