Zhang Zhinan, Cai Xiaowen, Liang Yuying, Zhang Rui, Liu Xinyu, Lu Liming, Huang Yong
School of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Medical College of Acu-Moxi and Rehabilitation, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Front Psychiatry. 2023 Jan 6;13:1012606. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.1012606. eCollection 2022.
BACKGROUND: Electroacupuncture (EA) is a promising therapy for depression. However, a comprehensive review of EA for depression is needed. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA 2020) guidelines to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EA for depression. Potentially relevant trials and reviews were searched in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CENTRAL from inception to March 2022. EA alone and combined with other therapy were eligible for inclusion. The severity of depression during and after treatment and the number of adverse events were assessed as outcomes. Risk of bias (ROB) evaluation, subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis, reporting bias assessment, and GRADE system evaluation were also conducted. RESULTS: Thirty-four trials were included. The overall ROB was medium. Low-quality evidence showed that the efficacy of EA was not less than that of antidepressants [EA + selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs)] and manual acupuncture (MA). EA and EA + SSRIs had better efficacy than SSRIs alone in decreasing the severity of depression during the early treatment. Moderate-quality evidence also showed that EA and EA + SSRIs were safer than SSRIs alone. Sensitivity analysis was mostly not feasible. Major publication bias was unlikely. CONCLUSION: These results indicate that the efficacy of EA is not less than that of antidepressants and MA. Moreover, EA and EA + SSRI treatments show a more rapid onset and greater safety than SSRIs. More high-quality trials are needed for further confirmation. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: [www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_ record.php?RecordID=329143], identifier [CRD42022329143].
背景:电针是一种很有前景的抑郁症治疗方法。然而,需要对电针治疗抑郁症进行全面综述。 方法:我们按照系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA 2020)指南进行了一项系统评价和Meta分析,以评估电针治疗抑郁症的疗效和安全性。从创刊至2022年3月,在MEDLINE、EMBASE、PsycINFO和CENTRAL中检索潜在相关试验和综述。单独使用电针以及电针联合其他疗法均符合纳入标准。将治疗期间及治疗后的抑郁严重程度和不良事件数量作为结局指标进行评估。还进行了偏倚风险(ROB)评估、亚组分析、敏感性分析、报告偏倚评估和GRADE系统评估。 结果:纳入了34项试验。总体偏倚风险为中等。低质量证据表明,电针的疗效不低于抗抑郁药[电针+选择性5-羟色胺再摄取抑制剂(SSRIs)和三环类抗抑郁药(TCAs)]以及手动针刺(MA)。在早期治疗期间,电针和电针+SSRIs在降低抑郁严重程度方面比单独使用SSRIs具有更好的疗效。中等质量证据还表明,电针和电针+SSRIs比单独使用SSRIs更安全。敏感性分析大多不可行。不太可能存在主要发表偏倚。 结论:这些结果表明,电针的疗效不低于抗抑郁药和手动针刺。此外,电针和电针+SSRI治疗比SSRIs起效更快且安全性更高。需要更多高质量试验进行进一步证实。 系统评价注册:[www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_ record.php?RecordID=329143],标识符[CRD42022329143]
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019-6-3
Front Med (Lausanne). 2022-8-18
Front Psychiatry. 2024-7-11
Res Nurs Health. 2023-2
Front Neurosci. 2024-4-30
Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2021-11-3
Front Psychiatry. 2021-8-20
Ann Intern Med. 2021-5
Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2021-5-7