Kwon Miri, Cheong Moon Joo, Leem Jungtae, Kim Tae-Hun
Department of Clinical Korean Medicine, College of Korean Medicine, Graduate School, Kyung Hee University, Seoul 02447, Korea.
Rare Diseases Integrative Treatment Research Institute, Wonkwang University, Jangheung Integrative Medical Hospital, Iksan 59338, Korea.
Healthcare (Basel). 2021 Nov 5;9(11):1502. doi: 10.3390/healthcare9111502.
We aimed to compare the effectiveness of some different acupuncture modalities on motor function using the unified Parkinson disease rating scale (UPDRS)-III scores of idiopathic Parkinson's disease (PD) via pairwise and network meta-analyses (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool was used to assess the methodological quality of the included RCTs. A frequentist approach-based random effect model NMA was performed. Seventeen RCTs with 1071 participants were included. The five following modalities were identified: combination of conventional medication (levodopa) with (1) electroacupuncture (ELEC), (2) manual acupuncture (MANU), (3) bee venom acupuncture (BEEV), (4) sham acupuncture (SHAM), and (5) conventional medication alone (CONV). In NMA on UPDRS-III, BEEV was the best modality compared to CONV (mean difference [MD]) -7.37, 95% confidence interval [-11.97, -2.77]). The comparative ranking assessed through NMA was suggested to be BEEV, MANU, ELEC, SHAM, and CONV. Regarding daily activity assessment (UPDRS-II), the magnitude of effectiveness was in the order of BEEV, ELEC, MANU, SHAM, and CONV. Combination treatment with BEEV (MANU or ELEC) and CONV can be recommended to improve motor function in PD patients. Due to the limited number of included RCTs, further NMA with more rigorous RCTs are warranted.
我们旨在通过对随机对照试验(RCT)进行成对和网状Meta分析(NMA),使用特发性帕金森病(PD)的统一帕金森病评定量表(UPDRS)-III评分,比较一些不同针灸方式对运动功能的有效性。采用Cochrane偏倚风险评估工具来评估纳入RCT的方法学质量。进行了基于频率学派方法的随机效应模型NMA。纳入了17项RCT,共1071名参与者。确定了以下五种方式:传统药物(左旋多巴)与(1)电针(ELEC)、(2)手针(MANU)、(3)蜂毒针灸(BEEV)、(4)假针灸(SHAM)以及(5)单纯传统药物(CONV)联合使用。在关于UPDRS-III的NMA中,与CONV相比,BEEV是最佳方式(平均差[MD])-7.37,95%置信区间[-11.97,-2.77])。通过NMA评估的比较排名建议为BEEV、MANU、ELEC、SHAM和CONV。关于日常活动评估(UPDRS-II),有效性程度依次为BEEV、ELEC、MANU、SHAM和CONV。可以推荐BEEV(MANU或ELEC)与CONV联合治疗以改善PD患者的运动功能。由于纳入的RCT数量有限,有必要进行更多严格RCT的进一步NMA。