Li Xiuxia, Wang Rong, Shi Xiue, Su Jinlong, Pan Yuanqing, Tian Jinhui, Yang Kehu
Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Key Laboratory of Evidence Based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, China.
Pain Pract. 2017 Nov;17(8):1066-1074. doi: 10.1111/papr.12555. Epub 2017 Feb 25.
Evaluating the clinical efficacy of acupuncture analgesia with systematic reviews (SRs) has attracted wide interest.
To collect a sample of published SRs on acupuncture analgesia in PubMed and examine them in terms of reporting characteristics and quality.
A search in PubMed was performed in January 2016. All SRs on acupuncture analgesia were included. To assess the quality of the SRs, AMSTAR tool and PRISMA Statements were used.
One hundred and nine SRs were included in our analysis, the yearly number of publications ranging from 1 in 1997 to 15 in 2015. Only 17% of these publications were Cochrane Systematic Reviews, and 94% were published in Science Citation Index journals. The United Kingdom was the country with the higher number of publications. Low back pain, headache, cancer pain, and labor pain were the most reported diseases or phenotypes. Nearly 73% of these SRs conducted a meta-analysis, 58% revealed positive results, 53% used RevMan software to analyze data, and 44% used the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for quality assessment. Only a few SRs assessed the likelihood of publication bias, reported details about the protocol and the registration information, and performed additional analyses.
The quantity and the quality of SRs regarding acupuncture analgesia have been promoted in recent years. More effort should be expended on the assessment of publication bias, the provision of detailed information about the protocol and the registration process, and the implementation of additional analyses to improve the validity of the SRs.
通过系统评价（SRs）评估针刺镇痛的临床疗效已引起广泛关注。
在PubMed上收集已发表的关于针刺镇痛的SRs样本，并从报告特征和质量方面进行审查。
于2016年1月在PubMed上进行检索。纳入所有关于针刺镇痛的SRs。使用AMSTAR工具和PRISMA声明来评估SRs的质量。
我们的分析纳入了109篇SRs，年发表数量从1997年的1篇到2015年的15篇不等。这些出版物中只有17%是Cochrane系统评价，94%发表在科学引文索引期刊上。英国是发表数量较多的国家。腰痛、头痛、癌痛和分娩痛是报道最多的疾病或表型。这些SRs中近73%进行了荟萃分析，58%显示出阳性结果，53%使用RevMan软件分析数据，44%使用Cochrane偏倚风险工具进行质量评估。只有少数SRs评估了发表偏倚的可能性，报告了方案和注册信息的详细情况，并进行了额外分析。
近年来，关于针刺镇痛的SRs在数量和质量上都有所提高。应在评估发表偏倚、提供方案和注册过程的详细信息以及进行额外分析以提高SRs的有效性方面付出更多努力。
