Zhang Shaowang, Li Yuanyin, Liang Zhide, Dai Jiaxing, Huang Hong, Zhang Huanghui, Yang Bing, Wang Jinghui, Tang Dongxin
Guizhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guiyang 550000, China; Talent Base for TCM Tumor Inheritance and Science and Technology Innovation of Guizhou Province, Guiyang 550000, China.
Department of Physical Education, College of Physical Education, Qingdao University, Qingdao 266071, China.
Complement Ther Med. 2025 Jun;90:103164. doi: 10.1016/j.ctim.2025.103164. Epub 2025 Mar 27.
Several studies have demonstrated the positive impact of non-pharmacological Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) therapies on pain, fatigue, sleep quality, and quality of life in cancer survivors. However, no research has compared the effectiveness of these therapies. This study aims to compare various interventions and identify the most effective non-pharmacological TCM therapies to provide evidence-based recommendations for cancer survivors.
A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, and Wanfang Data. RCTs investigating the effects of Taichi, Qigong, acupuncture, acupressure, TCM emotional therapy, and mixed therapies as interventions for cancer survivors were screened was conducted. Data from the creation of the database to February 2025 were included. Two independent reviewers evaluated the study quality. A Bayesian Network Meta-analysis was conducted to carry out a random effects model.
Seventy-one RCTs involving 6473 patients were included in the analysis. Network meta-analysis showed significance for all five intervention therapies in pain control in cancer patients. The best efficacy was observed for acupressure (SMD=-1.1 [-1.55, -0.66]) and Taichi/Qigong (SMD=-1.08[-1.64, -0.53]), followed by TCM emotional therapy (SMD=-0.93 [-1.42, -0.44]) and acupuncture (SMD=-0.54 [-0.93, -0.15]), with the latter showing comparatively lower efficacy. None of the interventions demonstrated superior efficacy in improving fatigue compared to the control group. Mixed therapies (SMD=-1.36[-2.56, -0.28]) demonstrated the greatest effect in improving sleep quality. Taichi/Qigong (SMD=1.87 [0.96, 2.83]) demonstrated certain advantages in improving quality of life. However, acupuncture and TCM emotional therapy had no significant effect on sleep quality or overall quality of life.
The evidence from this study suggests that acupressure and Taichi/Qigong are recommended as the most effective therapies for pain relief and quality of life improvement, respectively. The efficacy of these therapies for fatigue remains inconclusive. However, due to the limited number of included studies and the high risk of bias, these results should be interpreted with caution. Future studies should include more rigorously designed high-quality randomized controlled trials to confirm their long-term efficacy and safety.
PROSPERO CRD42024601976.
多项研究已证明非药物中医（TCM）疗法对癌症幸存者的疼痛、疲劳、睡眠质量和生活质量具有积极影响。然而，尚无研究比较这些疗法的有效性。本研究旨在比较各种干预措施，确定最有效的非药物中医疗法，为癌症幸存者提供循证建议。
在PubMed、Embase、Web of Science、中国知网（CNKI）和万方数据中进行系统检索。筛选调查太极拳、气功、针灸、指压、中医情志疗法及混合疗法作为癌症幸存者干预措施效果的随机对照试验（RCT）。纳入从数据库创建至2025年2月的数据。两名独立评审员评估研究质量。进行贝叶斯网络Meta分析以实施随机效应模型。
分析纳入了71项涉及6473例患者的RCT。网络Meta分析表明，所有五种干预疗法在癌症患者疼痛控制方面均有显著效果。指压（标准化均数差[SMD]=-1.1[-1.55，-0.66]）和太极拳/气功（SMD=-1.08[-1.64，-0.53]）观察到最佳疗效，其次是中医情志疗法（SMD=-0.93[-1.42，-0.44]）和针灸（SMD=-0.54[-0.93，-0.15]），后者疗效相对较低。与对照组相比，没有一种干预措施在改善疲劳方面显示出卓越疗效。混合疗法（SMD=-1.36[-2.56，-0.28]）在改善睡眠质量方面效果最显著。太极拳/气功（SMD=1.87[0.96，2.83]）在改善生活质量方面显示出一定优势。然而，针灸和中医情志疗法对睡眠质量或总体生活质量无显著影响。
本研究证据表明，推荐指压和太极拳/气功分别作为缓解疼痛和改善生活质量的最有效疗法。这些疗法对疲劳的疗效尚无定论。然而，由于纳入研究数量有限且偏倚风险高，这些结果应谨慎解读。未来研究应纳入设计更严谨的高质量随机对照试验，以确认其长期疗效和安全性。
PROSPERO CRD42024601976
