Li Jiang-Hong, Wang Re-Qin, Guo Wen-Jie, Li Juan-Sheng
Tianshui City Center for Disease Control, Gansu, China.
Tianshui City Center for Disease Control, Gansu, China.
J Chin Med Assoc. 2016 May;79(5):281-91. doi: 10.1016/j.jcma.2015.10.009. Epub 2016 Feb 27.
In March 2009, the first reported case infected with influenza A (H1N1) virus was identified in Mexico. The World Health Organization officially declared the outbreak to be a pandemic on June 11, 2009. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) in the treatment of influenza A (H1N1) infection.
We electronically and manually searched electronic databases, reference lists, and conference compilations to identify randomized clinical trials that compared the treatment of influenza A (H1N1) using TCM with a control group receiving oseltamivir or antivirus therapy. The Jadad score was used to assess trial quality. Duration of viral shedding, time to defervescence, and effective rate were taken as outcome measurements; additionally, heterogeneity analysis and meta-analysis were performed.
A total of 30 studies were included in our investigation, and these studies together included 3444 cases. Based on the Jadad score, each of these studies were divided as follows: high-quality studies (n = 3), medium-quality studies (n = 2), and low quality studies (n = 25). A meta analysis was performed, which indicated that the time to defervescence between the TCM treatment group and the control group was statistically significant, the duration of viral [Influenza A (H1N1)] shedding in the integrated Chinese and Western medicine subgroups was statistically significant, but it was not statistically significant between the two groups, the effective rate between the two groups was not statistically significant. A total of 18 studies described adverse drug reactions.
The results of our study indicated that the mean time to defervescence in the TCM treatment group was less than noted in the control group, and that the duration of viral [Influenza A (H1N1)] shedding in the integrated Chinese and Western medicine subgroups was less than that noted in the control group. However, the available evidence does not consider the fact that the difference in duration of viral shedding and effective rate between the two groups was statistically similar. No obvious adverse events were reported in the included studies.
2009年3月，墨西哥确认了首例感染甲型H1N1流感病毒的病例。2009年6月11日，世界卫生组织正式宣布该疫情为大流行。本研究的目的是评估中药治疗甲型H1N1流感感染的疗效和安全性。
我们通过电子和手动检索电子数据库、参考文献列表和会议汇编，以确定将中药治疗甲型H1N1流感与接受奥司他韦或抗病毒治疗的对照组进行比较的随机临床试验。采用Jadad评分评估试验质量。以病毒 shedding持续时间、退热时间和有效率作为结局指标；此外，进行了异质性分析和荟萃分析。
我们的调查共纳入30项研究，这些研究共包括3444例病例。根据Jadad评分，这些研究分为以下几类：高质量研究（n = 3）、中等质量研究（n = 2）和低质量研究（n = 25）。进行了荟萃分析，结果表明中药治疗组与对照组的退热时间有统计学意义，中西医结合亚组的甲型H1N1流感病毒shedding持续时间有统计学意义，但两组间无统计学意义，两组的有效率无统计学意义。共有18项研究描述了药物不良反应。
我们的研究结果表明，中药治疗组的平均退热时间短于对照组，中西医结合亚组的甲型H1N1流感病毒shedding持续时间短于对照组。然而，现有证据并未考虑两组间病毒shedding持续时间和有效率的差异在统计学上相似这一事实。纳入的研究中未报告明显的不良事件。
