Vivera Manuel Joseph, Gomersall Judith Streak
Joanna Briggs Institute, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Adelaide, Australia.
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2016 Apr;14(4):198-228. doi: 10.11124/JBISRIR-2016-2402.
Ardita (facial paralysis) is a medical condition that disfigures or distorts the facial appearance of the sufferer causing facial asymmetry and malfunction. Ardita patients may benefit from considering alternative treatments such as Ayurveda, including Taila Nasya (nasal instillation of medicated oil).
To synthesize the best available evidence on the effectiveness of different Nasya oils in the treatment of Ardita.
Studies conducted on adult sufferers (18-70 years) of Ardita (chronic or acute) in any setting were considered. Studies including participants who were pregnant or suffered allergic rhinitis, fever, intracranial tumor/hemorrhage and bilateral facial palsy were excluded.
INTERVENTION(S)/COMPARATOR(S): Standalone treatment of Nasya (at all dosages and frequencies) compared to Nasya in combination with other Ayurvedic treatments was considered. Comparisons between different interventions including Taila Nasya alone, Taila Nasya in combination with other Ayurvedic interventions and Ayurvedic interventions that did not include Taila Nasya were also considered.
Changes in Ardita symptoms, including facial distortion, speech disorders and facial pain, were measured.
All quantitative study designs (experimental, quasi-experimental and observational) were considered.
Relevant studies were identified following a comprehensive literature search. References provided within these key studies identified additional resources. Indian universities were also contacted for results of Ardita studies undertaken in their institutions.A three-step search strategy aimed to find studies of published and unpublished studies was undertaken. Studies published in the English language were considered for inclusion, irrespective of publication date/year. Following an initial limited search of MEDLINE and CINAHL, the text words contained in the title and abstract, and of the index terms used to describe each articles were analyzed. From the identified keywords and index terms, searches were undertaken across all relevant databases such as PubMed, CINHAL, Cochrane (CENTRAL), Scopus, Centre for Review and Dissemination databases, Turning Research into Practice (TRIP), EMBASE, EBM Reviews, DHARA, Google Scholar, MedNar and ProQuest Dissertations. Finally, reference lists of identified theses and articles were searched for additional studies. Universities and website operators related to Ayurvedic research in India were contacted, including the National Institute of Ayurveda for relevant studies. Besides this, the University of Adelaide librarian was contacted to retrieve those studies identified in the reference lists of theses and articles.
Studies were critically assessed by the review author and a secondary reviewer prior to inclusion in the review using the standardized critical appraisal instrument from the Joanna Briggs Institute.
Data was extracted by the primary reviewer using the standardized data extraction tool from the Joanna Briggs Institute.
Different interventions and comparators across studies precluded meta-analysis. Narrative synthesis was performed.
Only two pseudo randomized studies with a small number of participants met inclusion criteria and were included in the review. One study with 20 participants, divided equally into two groups compared the effectiveness of two nasal instillations in alleviating four Ardita symptoms. The second study of 15 participants each in two groups compared the effectiveness of nasal instillation with placement of medicated oil on the head on seven Ardita symptoms. Observational measurements of Ardita symptoms were graded as Mild, Moderate or Marked at baseline and after one month. The study conducted on 30 participants using Nasya intervention showed participants had better relief from the symptoms of facial pain, speech disorder and earache within the range of 78.2% to 90.9%, graded as Marked. Along with statistical data available in the studies, this review found low levels of evidence favoring Taila Nasya intervention. The review did not include any studies examining effectiveness of Nasya compared to conventional treatment for Ardita.
This review presents extremely limited evidence from only two small experimental studies that administration of Nasya oil alone may provide some relief from Ardita symptoms of facial distortion, speech disorder, inability to shut eyelids/upward eye rolling and dribbling of saliva in adult patients. No strong conclusions may be drawn from the evidence included in the review due to the limited number of studies, limited number of participants and poor quality of studies.
Practitioners should advice Ardita patients that there is extremely limited evidence suggesting the potential effectiveness of Nasya oils alone or Nasya in conjunction with other Ayurvedic treatments in managing symptoms. However, given the absence of a strong evidence base, practitioners should be guided by clinical wisdom and patient preference.
Well controlled clinical trials comparing standalone Nasya therapy to other Ayurvedic treatments and/or conventional medicine for Ardita symptoms need to be conducted to examine the relative effectiveness of different Nasya oils in treating Ardita.
面瘫是一种会使患者面部容貌变形或扭曲的病症,导致面部不对称和功能障碍。面瘫患者可能会从考虑替代疗法中受益,如阿育吠陀医学,包括滴鼻油疗法(将药用油滴入鼻腔)。
综合现有最佳证据,以评估不同滴鼻油治疗面瘫的有效性。
纳入标准
纳入在任何环境下对成年(18 - 70岁)面瘫患者(慢性或急性)进行的研究。排除包括孕妇或患有过敏性鼻炎、发热、颅内肿瘤/出血以及双侧面瘫患者的研究。
干预措施/对照:考虑单独使用滴鼻油疗法(所有剂量和频率)与滴鼻油疗法联合其他阿育吠陀治疗方法的比较。也考虑不同干预措施之间的比较,包括单独使用滴鼻油疗法、滴鼻油疗法联合其他阿育吠陀干预措施以及不包括滴鼻油疗法的阿育吠陀干预措施。
测量面瘫症状的变化,包括面部扭曲、言语障碍和面部疼痛。
考虑所有定量研究设计(实验性、准实验性和观察性)。
通过全面的文献检索确定相关研究。这些关键研究中提供的参考文献确定了其他资源。还联系了印度各大学以获取其机构中进行的面瘫研究结果。采用三步检索策略,旨在查找已发表和未发表研究的相关研究。纳入发表于英文的研究,无论其出版日期/年份。在对MEDLINE和CINAHL进行初步有限检索后,对标题和摘要中包含的文本词以及用于描述每篇文章的索引词进行了分析。根据已确定的关键词和索引词,在所有相关数据库中进行检索,如PubMed、CINHAL、Cochrane(CENTRAL)、Scopus、综述与传播中心数据库、将研究转化为实践(TRIP)、EMBASE、循证医学综述、DHARA、谷歌学术、MedNar和ProQuest学位论文数据库。最后,在已确定的论文和文章的参考文献列表中搜索其他研究。联系了印度与阿育吠陀研究相关的大学和网站运营者,包括国家阿育吠陀研究所以获取相关研究。除此之外,还联系了阿德莱德大学图书馆员以检索在论文和文章参考文献列表中确定的那些研究。
在纳入综述之前,由综述作者和一名二级评审员使用乔安娜·布里格斯研究所的标准化批判性评价工具对研究进行严格评估。
由第一评审员使用乔安娜·布里格斯研究所的标准化数据提取工具提取数据。
由于各研究中的不同干预措施和对照无法进行荟萃分析,因此进行了叙述性综合分析。
仅有两项参与者数量较少的伪随机研究符合纳入标准并被纳入综述。一项有20名参与者的研究将其平均分为两组,比较了两种滴鼻疗法缓解四种面瘫症状的有效性。第二项研究每组有15名参与者,比较了滴鼻疗法与在头部涂抹药用油对七种面瘫症状的有效性。对面瘫症状的观察性测量在基线和一个月后分为轻度、中度或重度。对30名参与者进行的滴鼻油干预研究表明,参与者在面部疼痛、言语障碍和耳痛症状方面有更好的缓解,缓解率在78.2%至90.9%之间,评定为重度。除了研究中提供的统计数据外,本综述发现支持滴鼻油干预的证据水平较低。该综述未包括任何将滴鼻油疗法与面瘫的传统治疗方法进行有效性比较的研究。
本综述仅从两项小型实验研究中获得了极其有限的证据,表明单独使用滴鼻油可能会使成年患者的面瘫症状(如面部扭曲、言语障碍、无法闭眼/眼球上翻和流口水)得到一定缓解。由于研究数量有限、参与者数量有限以及研究质量较差,无法从综述中纳入的证据得出强有力的结论。
从业者应告知面瘫患者,仅有极其有限的证据表明单独使用滴鼻油或滴鼻油联合其他阿育吠陀治疗方法在缓解症状方面可能有效。然而,鉴于缺乏强有力的证据基础,从业者应依据临床经验和患者偏好做出指导。
需要进行严格对照的临床试验,比较单独使用滴鼻油疗法与其他阿育吠陀治疗方法和/或传统药物治疗面瘫症状的效果,以检验不同滴鼻油治疗面瘫的相对有效性。