Li Yanfei, Qin Yu, Chen Nan, Ge Long, Wang Qi, Aboudou Taslim, Han Jiani, Hou Liangying, Cao Liujiao, Li Rui, Li Meixuan, Mi Ningning, Xie Peng, Wu Siqing, Hu Linmin, Li Xiuxia, Song Zhongyang, Ji Jing, Zhang Zhiming, 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.
Front Pharmacol. 2023 Jan 19;14:1069879. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1069879. eCollection 2023.
The potential effectiveness of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) against "epidemic diseases" has highlighted the knowledge gaps associated with TCM in COVID-19 management. This study aimed to map the matrix for rigorously assessing, organizing, and presenting evidence relevant to TCM in COVID-19 management. In this study, we used the methodology of evidence mapping (EM). Nine electronic databases, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal, ClinicalTrials.gov, gray literature, reference lists of articles, and relevant Chinese conference proceedings, were searched for articles published until 23 March 2022. The EndNote X9, Rayyan, EPPI, and R software were used for data entry and management. In all, 126 studies, including 76 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 50 systematic reviews (SRs), met our inclusion criteria. Of these, only nine studies (7.14%) were designated as high quality: four RCTs were assessed as "low risk of bias" and five SRs as "high quality." Based on the research objectives of these studies, the included studies were classified into treatment (53 RCTs and 50 SRs, 81.75%), rehabilitation (20 RCTs, 15.87%), and prevention (3 RCTs, 2.38%) groups. A total of 76 RCTs included 59 intervention categories and 57 efficacy outcomes. All relevant trials consistently demonstrated that TCM significantly improved 22 outcomes (i.e., consistent positive outcomes) without significantly affecting four (i.e., consistent negative outcomes). Further, 50 SRs included nine intervention categories and 27 efficacy outcomes, two of which reported consistent positive outcomes and two reported consistent negative outcomes. Moreover, 45 RCTs and 38 SRs investigated adverse events; 39 RCTs and 30 SRs showed no serious adverse events or significant differences between groups. This study provides evidence matrix mapping of TCM against COVID-19, demonstrating the potential efficacy and safety of TCM in the treatment and prevention of COVID-19 and rehabilitation of COVID-19 patients, and also addresses evidence gaps. Given the limited number and poor quality of available studies and potential concerns regarding the applicability of the current clinical evaluation standards to TCM, the effect of specific interventions on individual outcomes needs further evaluation.
中医药对“疫病”的潜在疗效凸显了中医药在新冠肺炎管理方面存在的知识空白。本研究旨在构建一个框架,用于严格评估、整理和呈现与中医药在新冠肺炎管理中相关的证据。在本研究中,我们采用了证据图谱(EM)方法。检索了九个电子数据库、世界卫生组织国际临床试验注册平台(ICTRP)搜索门户、ClinicalTrials.gov、灰色文献、文章参考文献列表以及相关的中国会议论文集,以查找截至2022年3月23日发表的文章。使用EndNote X9、Rayyan、EPPI和R软件进行数据录入和管理。总共126项研究符合我们的纳入标准,其中包括76项随机对照试验(RCT)和50项系统评价(SR)。其中,只有9项研究(7.14%)被认定为高质量:4项RCT被评估为“低偏倚风险”,5项SR被评估为“高质量”。根据这些研究的研究目标,纳入的研究分为治疗组(53项RCT和50项SR,81.75%)、康复组(20项RCT,15.87%)和预防组(3项RCT,2.38%)。总共76项RCT包括59个干预类别和57个疗效结果。所有相关试验一致表明,中医药显著改善了22个结果(即一致的阳性结果),且未显著影响4个结果(即一致的阴性结果)。此外,50项SR包括9个干预类别和27个疗效结果,其中两项报告了一致的阳性结果,两项报告了一致的阴性结果。此外,45项RCT和38项SR调查了不良事件;39项RCT和30项SR显示无严重不良事件或组间无显著差异。本研究提供了中医药防治新冠肺炎的证据图谱,证明了中医药在治疗和预防新冠肺炎以及新冠肺炎患者康复方面的潜在疗效和安全性,同时也填补了证据空白。鉴于现有研究数量有限且质量不佳,以及当前临床评估标准对中医药适用性的潜在担忧,特定干预措施对个体结果的影响需要进一步评估。