Suppr超能文献

帕金森病伴便秘的非药物干预措施的比较疗效:一项系统评价和网状荟萃分析。

Comparative efficacy of non-pharmacological interventions for Parkinson's disease with constipation: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

作者信息

Zhang Peiying, Su Xiaojuan, Han Xuan, Zhao Dingmeng, Wang Jinyan, Yang Yanyi, Ye Hejiang

机构信息

College of Clinical Medicine, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, China.

Hubei Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Wuhan, China.

出版信息

Front Neurol. 2025 Jun 2;16:1579556. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2025.1579556. eCollection 2025.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

This network meta-analysis aims to evaluate the comparative efficacy of non-pharmacological interventions on Parkinson's disease (PD) with constipation.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted in seven major databases (CINAHL, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials [CENTRAL], Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure [CNKI], and Wanfang) up to August 2024. Eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated non-pharmacological interventions for PD with constipation were included. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, and a frequentist network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed using STATA 18 to estimate relative treatment effects.

RESULTS

From 2084 initially identified records, 12 RCTs ( = 881 patients) met inclusion criteria. The four interventions evaluated included complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), evidence-based nursing (EBN), physical agents (PAs), and traditional Chinese medicine (TCM). Direct comparisons revealed significantly superior efficacy for both EBN and PAs compared to control conditions ( < 0.05). The NMA demonstrated consistent superiority of PAs and EBN over passive control, placebo, and sham interventions (all  < 0.05), with the following efficacy hierarchy: PAs (most effective) > EBN > CAM > TCM (least effective).

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that non-pharmacological approaches, particularly PA-based interventions, may offer clinically meaningful benefits for constipation management in PD. Nevertheless, the relatively small number of available studies and methodological limitations in several trials necessitate cautious interpretation. Further rigorously designed RCTs are warranted to confirm these preliminary observations and establish optimal treatment protocols.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, CRD42024565248.

摘要

背景

本网络荟萃分析旨在评估非药物干预对帕金森病(PD)合并便秘的比较疗效。

方法

截至2024年8月,在七个主要数据库(CINAHL、Cochrane对照试验中央注册库[CENTRAL]、Embase、PubMed、科学网、中国知网[CNKI]和万方)中进行了全面检索。纳入评估非药物干预治疗PD合并便秘的合格随机对照试验(RCT)。使用Cochrane偏倚风险工具评估方法学质量,并使用STATA 18进行频率学派网络荟萃分析(NMA)以估计相对治疗效果。

结果

从最初识别的2084条记录中,12项RCT(n = 881例患者)符合纳入标准。评估的四种干预措施包括补充和替代医学(CAM)、循证护理(EBN)、物理因子(PAs)和中药(TCM)。直接比较显示,与对照条件相比,EBN和PAs的疗效均显著更优(P < 0.05)。NMA表明,PAs和EBN相对于被动对照、安慰剂和假干预均具有持续的优越性(均P < 0.05),疗效等级如下:PAs(最有效)> EBN > CAM > TCM(最无效)。

结论

我们的研究结果表明,非药物方法,特别是基于PA的干预措施,可能为PD便秘管理提供具有临床意义的益处。然而,现有研究数量相对较少以及多项试验存在方法学局限性,需要谨慎解读。有必要进一步开展设计严谨的RCT以证实这些初步观察结果并建立最佳治疗方案。

系统评价注册

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/,CRD42024565248。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d2e4/12171382/4c6709a2d83b/fneur-16-1579556-g001.jpg

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