Suppr超能文献

[中成药治疗糖尿病足溃疡的随机对照试验总结与评价]

[Summary and evaluation of randomized controlled trial on Chinese patent medicine in treatment of diabetic foot ulcer].

作者信息

Song Wen-Ting, Zhang Ya-Zi, Wang Yue-Tong, Hu Hai-Yin, Jin Xin-Yao, Pang Wen-Tai, Shi Meng-Long, Ji Zhao-Chen, Yang Feng-Wen

机构信息

Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine Tianjin 301617,China.

Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine Tianjin 301617,China Haihe Laboratory of Modern Chinese Medicine Tianjin 301617,China.

出版信息

Zhongguo Zhong Yao Za Zhi. 2024 Feb;49(4):1113-1121. doi: 10.19540/j.cnki.cjcmm.20231019.501.

Abstract

This study systematically collected, analyzed, and evaluated randomized controlled trial(RCT) in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcer(DFU). The aim as provide references for future studies and to enhance the application of clinical evidence. The RCT of DFU treated with Chinese Patent Medicine was obtained and analyzed using the AI-Clinical Evidence Database of Chinese Patent Medicine(AICED-CPM). The analysis was supplemented with data from CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, SinoMed, PubMed, EMbase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. A total of 275 RCTs meeting the requirements were retrieved, with only 7 of them having a sample size of 200 or more. These trials involved 66 different Chinese patent medicine including 25 oral medications, 24 Chinese herbal injections, and 17 external drugs. Among the 33 different intervention/control designs identified, the most common design was Chinese patent medicine + conventional treatment vs conventional treatment(86 cases, 31.27%). Out of the 275 articles included in the literature, 50 did not provide information on the specific course of treatment(18.18%). A total of 10 counting indicators(with a frequency of 426) and 36 measuring indicators(with a frequency of 962) were utilized. The methodological quality of the RCT for the treatment of DFU with Chinese patent medicine was found to be low, with deficiencies in blind methods, other bias factors, study registration, and sample size estimation. There were noticeable shortcomings in the reporting of allocation hiding and implementation bias(blind method application). More studies should prioritize trial registration, program design, and strict quality control during implementation to provide valuable data for clinical practice and serve as a reference for future investigations.

摘要

本研究系统收集、分析和评价了治疗糖尿病足溃疡(DFU)的随机对照试验(RCT)。目的是为未来研究提供参考并加强临床证据的应用。使用中成药人工智能临床证据数据库(AICED-CPM)获取并分析了用中成药治疗DFU的RCT。分析还补充了来自中国知网、万方、维普、中国生物医学文献数据库、PubMed、EMbase、Cochrane图书馆和Web of Science的数据。共检索到275项符合要求的RCT,其中只有7项样本量为200或更多。这些试验涉及66种不同的中成药,包括25种口服药、24种中药注射剂和17种外用药。在确定的33种不同的干预/对照设计中,最常见的设计是中成药+传统治疗 vs 传统治疗(86例,31.27%)。在纳入文献的275篇文章中,50篇未提供具体治疗疗程的信息(18.18%)。共使用了10个计数指标(出现频率为426)和36个测量指标(出现频率为962)。发现用中成药治疗DFU的RCT的方法学质量较低,在盲法、其他偏倚因素、研究注册和样本量估计方面存在缺陷。在分配隐藏和实施偏倚(盲法应用)的报告方面存在明显不足。更多研究应优先进行试验注册、方案设计并在实施过程中进行严格的质量控制,以便为临床实践提供有价值的数据并为未来研究提供参考。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验