Acupuncture and Tuina School, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu 610075, Sichuan Province, China.
School of Health Preservation and Rehabilitation, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu 610075, Sichuan Province, China.
J Integr Med. 2022 Jan;20(1):13-25. doi: 10.1016/j.joim.2021.11.001. Epub 2021 Nov 7.
Functional constipation (FC) is one of the most prevalent functional gastrointestinal disorders. Dissatisfaction with medications prescribed to treat FC may lead patients to seek alternative treatments. Numerous systematic reviews (SRs) examining the use of acupuncture to treat FC have reported inconsistent results, and the quality of these studies has not been fully evaluated.
In this overview, we evaluated and summarized clinical evidence on the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture for treating FC and evaluated the quality and bias of the SRs we reviewed.
The search strategy was structured by medical subject headings and search terms such as "acupuncture therapy" and "functional constipation." Electronic searches were conducted in eight databases from their inception to September 2020.
SRs that investigated the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture for managing FC were included.
Two authors independently extracted information and appraised the methodology, reporting accuracy, quality of evidence, and risk of bias using the following critical appraisal tools: (1) A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2); (2) Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews (ROBIS); (3) Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses for Acupuncture (PRISMA-A); and (4) the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE). A κ index was used to score the level of agreement between the 2 reviewers.
Thirteen SRs that examined the clinical utility of acupuncture for treating FC were identified. Using the AMSTAR 2 tool, we rated 92.3% (12/13) of the SRs as "critically low" confidence and one study as "low" confidence. Using the ROBIS criteria, 38.5% (5/13) of the SRs were considered to have "low risk" of bias. Based on PRISMA-A, 76.9% (10/13) of the SRs had over 70% compliance with reporting standards. The inter-rater agreement was good for AMSTAR 2, ROBIS, and PRISMA-A. Using the GRADE tool, we classified 22.5% (9/40) of the measured outcomes as "moderate" quality, 57.5% (23/40) as "low" quality, and 20.0% (8/40) as "very low" quality. The inter-rater agreement was moderate when using GRADE. Descriptive analyses indicated that acupuncture was more efficacious than sham acupuncture for improving weekly complete spontaneous bowel movements (CSBMs) and for raising the Bristol Stool Form Scale (BSFS) score. Acupuncture appeared to be superior to anti-constipation drugs for improving weekly spontaneous bowel movements, the total effective rate, and the Patient Assessment of Constipation Quality of Life score. Although ten SRs mentioned the occurrence of adverse events, serious adverse events were not associated with acupuncture treatment.
Acupuncture may be more efficacious than sham acupuncture for improving CSBMs and BSFS scores and may be superior to anti-constipation drugs for improving bowel movement frequency, as well as quality of life. Limitations to current studies and inconsistent evidence suggest a need for more rigorous and methodologically sound SRs to draw definitive conclusions.
PROSPERO CRD42020189173.
功能性便秘(FC)是最常见的功能性胃肠疾病之一。患者对治疗 FC 所开药物的不满可能会导致他们寻求替代疗法。许多系统评价(SRs)研究了针刺治疗 FC 的效果,报告结果不一致,并且这些研究的质量尚未得到充分评估。
在本篇综述中,我们评估并总结了针刺治疗 FC 的有效性和安全性的临床证据,并评估了我们所综述的 SRs 的质量和偏倚。
检索策略通过医学主题词和“针刺疗法”和“功能性便秘”等搜索词构建。从各数据库成立到 2020 年 9 月进行了电子检索。
纳入了调查针刺治疗 FC 的有效性和安全性的 SRs。
两名作者独立提取信息,并使用以下关键评估工具评估方法学、报告准确性、证据质量和偏倚风险:(1)评估系统评价的测量工具 2(AMSTAR 2);(2)系统评价偏倚风险(ROBIS);(3)针刺治疗系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA-A);(4)评估、发展和评估的分级(GRADE)。使用 κ 指数来衡量两位评审员之间的一致性水平。
共确定了 13 项研究针刺治疗 FC 的临床应用的 SRs。使用 AMSTAR 2 工具,我们将 92.3%(12/13)的 SRs 评为“严重低”置信度,一项研究评为“低”置信度。使用 ROBIS 标准,38.5%(5/13)的 SRs 被认为具有“低风险”偏倚。基于 PRISMA-A,76.9%(10/13)的 SRs 报告标准的符合率超过 70%。AMSTAR 2、ROBIS 和 PRISMA-A 的观察者间一致性良好。使用 GRADE 工具,我们将 22.5%(9/40)的测量结果评定为“中等”质量,57.5%(23/40)为“低”质量,20.0%(8/40)为“极低”质量。使用 GRADE 时,观察者间一致性为中等。描述性分析表明,与假针刺相比,针刺在改善每周完全自发性排便(CSBMs)和提高布里斯托粪便形状量表(BSFS)评分方面更有效。针刺在改善每周自发性排便、总有效率和患者便秘生活质量评分方面似乎优于抗便秘药物。尽管 10 项 SRs 提到了不良反应的发生,但严重不良反应与针刺治疗无关。
与假针刺相比,针刺可能更有效地改善 CSBMs 和 BSFS 评分,并且可能优于抗便秘药物,改善排便频率以及生活质量。目前研究的局限性和不一致的证据表明,需要更严格和方法学上更合理的 SRs 来得出明确的结论。
PROSPERO CRD42020189173。