Dataset Information

Traditional Chinese medicine for neck pain and low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: Neck pain (NP) and low back pain (LBP) are common symptoms bothering people in daily life. Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) has been used to treat various symptoms and diseases in China and has been demonstrated to be effective. The objective of the present study was to review and analyze the existing data about pain and disability in TCM treatments for NP and LBP.Studies were identified by a comprehensive search of databases, such as MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library, up to September 1, 2013. A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TCM in managing NP and LBP.Seventy five randomized controlled trials (n = 11077) were included. Almost all of the studies investigated individuals experiencing chronic NP (CNP) or chronic LBP (CLBP). We found moderate evidence that acupuncture was more effective than sham-acupuncture in reducing pain immediately post-treatment for CNP (visual analogue scale (VAS) 10 cm, mean difference (MD) = -0.58 (-0.94, -0.22), 95% confidence interval, p = 0.01), CLBP (standardized mean difference = -0.47 (-0.77, -0.17), p = 0.003), and acute LBP (VAS 10 cm, MD = -0.99 (-1.24, -0.73), p< 0.001). Cupping could be more effective than waitlist in VAS (100 mm) (MD = -19.10 (-27.61, -10.58), p < 0. 001) for CNP or medications (e.g. NSAID) for CLBP (MD = -5.4 (-8.9, -0.19), p = 0.003). No serious or life-threatening adverse effects were found.Acupuncture, acupressure, and cupping could be efficacious in treating the pain and disability associated with CNP or CLBP in the immediate term. Gua sha, tai chi, qigong, and Chinese manipulation showed fair effects, but we were unable to draw any definite conclusions, and further research is still needed. The efficacy of tuina and moxibustion is unknown because no direct evidence was obtained. These TCM modalities are relatively safe.

SUBMITTER: Yuan QL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4339195 | biostudies-literature | 2015

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Traditional Chinese medicine for neck pain and low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Yuan Qi-ling QL Guo Tuan-mao TM Liu Liang L Sun Fu F Zhang Yin-gang YG

PloS one 20150224 2

<h4>Background</h4>Neck pain (NP) and low back pain (LBP) are common symptoms bothering people in daily life. Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) has been used to treat various symptoms and diseases in China and has been demonstrated to be effective. The objective of the present study was to review and analyze the existing data about pain and disability in TCM treatments for NP and LBP.<h4>Methods</h4>Studies were identified by a comprehensive search of databases, such as MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Coc ...[more]

PMID: 25710765

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundExtensive studies have been conducted to evaluate the pain relief effect of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) interventions on patients with low back pain, including in China. However, there is a dearth in the literature documenting the diverse goals of TCM interventions, let alone the overall effect of such interventions. In this study, the goal attainment scaling (GAS) method was adopted to evaluate individualised TCM interventions on chronic low back pain.MethodsA pre-post intervention study was conducted on patients with chronic low back pain who received individualised TCM interventions in community health services. The study was undertaken in three community health centres in Hangzhou of China. A total of 165 eligible patients were invited, and 150 participated in the study, including 136 who completed both pre- and postintervention surveys. Each participant was asked to identify three to five intended goals from a pool of 26 outcome indicators and their corresponding expectations of these goals prior to the TCM interventions. Their conditions were rated against the selected indicators on a self-report five-point Likert scale before and after the TCM interventions, respectively. Gaps between the actual conditions and the expected goals were summed up for each participant and converted into a standardised GAS score, with a higher score indicating higher achievements, and 50 indicting patient expectations were met. Linear regression models were established to determine the factors associated with the pre-post GAS changes after adjustment for variations in other variables.ResultsOn average, an increase of 14.99 (SD = 9.81) in the GAS scores was achieved. This resulted in a mean GAS score of 48.33 (SD = 9.74) after the TCM interventions, falling slightly short (<2) of patient expectations. The multivariate linear regression models revealed that local residents, the retired, and those who perceived lower professional competency of their attending doctors had a smaller increase in the GAS scores after adjustment for variations in other variables.ConclusionThe individualised TCM interventions can help patients with low back pain to achieve their expected goals as measured by the GAS. Further studies are needed to better understand how patients set up their goals and the professional competency requirements to meet patient expectations.

Project description:BackgroundCancer pain is one of the most intolerable and frightening symptoms of cancer patients. However, the clinical effect of the three-step analgesic ladder method (TSAL) is not satisfactory. The combination of external treatment of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) can improve the clinical effect.ObjectiveThis study used network meta-analysis to compare the effects of different external treatment methods of TCM combined with TSAL on cancer pain.MethodsDatabases searched by our team included Google Scholar, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Library. Randomized controlled trials related to the external treatment of TCM combined with TSAL for cancer pain were screened from the establishment of the database till now. The above literature extracted clinical efficacy, NRS score, KPS score, analgesic onset time, and duration as the main results after the screening. The 95% confidence interval (95% CI) of OR value and SMD value was used as the effect index to compare the difference in efficacy of different interventions, and the ranking was conducted. STATA 17.0 software was used for the statistical analysis of the above data.ResultsA total of 78 studies were included, including 8 interventions and 5742 participants. Based on ranking probability, the clinical effective rate of manual acupuncture combined with TSAL was the best when the intervention time was set at 4 weeks [OR = 5.42, 95% CI (1.99,14.81)], and the improvement effect on KPS score was also the best [SMD = 0.97, 95% CI (0.61, 1.33)]. Acupoint external application was the best intervention in reducing NRS score [SMD = -1.14, 95% CI (-1.90, -0.93)]. Acupoint moxibustion combined with TSAL was considered to be the most effective intervention to prolong the duration of analgesia [SMD = 1.69, 95% CI (0.84, 2.54)] and shortening the onset time of analgesia [SMD = -3.00, 95% CI (-4.54, -1.47)].ConclusionsTSAL combined with manual acupuncture is the best in terms of clinical efficacy and improvement of patients' functional activity status. With the extension of treatment time, the intervention of this kind of treatment on the clinical effect is more pronounced. Acupoint external application also has a unique advantage in reducing the pain level of patients. From the point of view of analgesic duration and duration of analgesia, combined acupoint moxibustion has the best effect.

Project description:BackgroundIdiopathic membranous nephropathy (IMN) is a rare autoimmune disorder that causes nephrotic syndromes in adults. Conventional immunosuppressive therapies often exhibit limited efficacy in achieving remission and may result in notable adverse reactions, warranting the exploration of novel therapeutic approaches for IMN treatment. Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), which is extensively used for kidney disease management, is a promising alternative.ObjectiveThis study aimed to examine the safety and efficacy of TCM alone or in combination with Western medicine for the management of patients diagnosed with IMN.MethodsThis study employed a systematic search of English and Chinese electronic databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined the application of TCM in the treatment of IMN. RCTs that met the predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria and assessed the safety and efficacy of TCM alone or in combination with Western medicine in patients with IMN were included in the analysis. The methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated by using a risk-of-bias tool. All statistical analyses were performed using the RevMan software (version 5.4.2). The evidence was evaluated on the https://www.gradepro.org/website.ResultsThis study included 29 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 1982 patients with moderate methodological quality that met the inclusion criteria. The results showed that, compared to Western medicine alone therapy, the use of TCM alone or in combination with Western medicine significantly improved total remission (TR) rate (risk ratios [RR] 1.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.29-1.46, I2 = 0%, P < 0.00001), complete remission (CR) rate (RR 1.78, 95% CI 1.48-2.15, I2 = 0, P < 0.00001), partial remission (PR) rate (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.161.40, I2 = 0%, P < 0.00001), and serum albumin (ALB) levels (MD: 4.05, 95% CI: 3.02-5.09, I2 = 91%, P < 0.00001). TCM alone or in combination with Western medicine also reduced proteinuria levels (mean difference [MD]: 1.05, 95% CI: 1.30 to -0.79, I2 = 95%, P < 0.00001), serum creatinine (SCr) levels (MD: 7.47, 95% CI: 13.70 to -1.24, I2 = 97%, P = 0.02), and serum antibodies against M-type phospholipase A2 receptor levels (aPLA2Rab) (MD: 19.24, 95% CI: 33.56 to -4.93, I2 = 87%, P = 0.008). Moreover, the efficacy of combined TCM and Western medicine is superior to that of Western medicine alone in reducing the incidence of infection, hepatotoxicity, and thrombosis. Although the primary and secondary outcomes were consistent, the evidence was generally moderate.ConclusionThe results of this study suggest that TCM alone or in combination with Western medicine may be a feasible alternative therapeutic approach for the treatment of IMN. Nevertheless, additional, rigorously designed, high-quality, and extensive clinical trials are imperative to provide substantial evidence regarding the effectiveness of TCM in managing IMN.

Project description:Ethnopharmacological relevanceTibetan traditional medicine CheeZheng Pain-Relieving Plaster (CZPRP) is frequently used as an over-the-counter external analgesic for musculoskeletal pain; however, its evidence for low back pain (LBP) has not been evaluated.Aim of the studyThis study aims to assess the efficacy and safety of CZPRP for both acute, subacute and chronic LBP through a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials.Materials and methodsPubMed, CENTRAL, CNKI, CQVIP, and Wanfang databases were searched through April 20, 2020 for randomized controlled trials of CZPRP for LBP. Eligible comparators were placebo, active treatment, or usual care. Clinical outcomes included pain severity, lower back function score, pain-free rate, and adverse events (AEs). Qualitative evaluations were conducted using the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tools. Quantitative analyses were conducted using a random-effects model.ResultsThis study includes 1674 LBP patients from nine clinical studies. Pooled analyses among subjects with acute LBP show 1) significant pain reductions (mean difference -0.84, 95% confidence interval[CI] -1.31, -0.37) in CZPRP plus diclofenac versus diclofenac, 2) significant improvements in lower back function (standard mean difference -1.50, 95% CI -2.16, -0.85) in CZPRP versus diclofenac, and 3) a higher pain-free rate in CZPRP alone (risk ratio 1.48, 95% CI 1.16, 1.89; I2 = 61%) or CZPRP plus nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (risk ratio 1.66, 95% CI 1.14, 2.40; I2 = 0%) versus NSAIDs. However, in a heterogeneous population with mixed LBP subtypes, there was no significant difference in pain outcomes between CZPRP and diclofenac. Additionally, CZPRP use did not increase AEs compared with no CZPRP (p = 0.40). All nine studies are associated with moderate to high risk of bias.ConclusionsThe use of CZPRP is associated with improved acute LBP outcomes compared to diclofenac. However, due to the moderate to high risk of bias of the studies, future rigorous randomized controlled trials are needed to evaluate the effects of CZPRP for acute and chronic LBP.

Project description:Background: Post-stroke cognitive impairment (PSCI) affects more than one-third of stroke patients, and causes much greater harm to long-term function than the initial brain damage. No conventional Western medications have shown convincing clinical effectiveness for treating PSCI. Research shows that Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) can improve cognitive function in patients. However, the clinical efficacy and safety remain controversial. The aim of this study was to examine the effectiveness and harmful effects of TCMs in the treatment of PSCI. Method: We searched seven databases and two clinical registration websites for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The revised Cochrane risk of bias tool (RoB 2.0) was used to evaluate the methodological quality and RevMan 5.4 was used for data analysis. This study has been submitted to PROSPERO with registration number is CRD42020149299. Results: We included 34 studies in this review. The results of this study showed that TCM adjuvant therapy improved scores on the MoCA [MD = 2.55, 95% CI (1.56, 3.53), p < 0.00001; MD = 3.07, 95% CI (1.98, 4.17), p < 0.00001 at treatment duration of <3 and 3 months, respectively], MMSE [MD = 2.55, 95% CI (1.99, 3.10), p < 0.00001; MD = 2.53, 95% CI (1.59, 3.47), p < 0.00001; MD = 2.91, 95% CI (1.26, 4.56), p = 0.0006; MD = 3.11, 95% CI (-0.04, 6.27), p = 0.05 at treatment duration of <3, 3, 4, and 6 months, respectively], and BI [MD = 7.34, 95% CI (3.83, 10.85), p < 0.0001; MD = 8.98, 95% CI (4.76, 13.21), p < 0.0001 at treatment duration of <3 and 3 months, respectively] and reduced scores on the ADL (MD = -8.64, 95% CI (-9.83, -7.45), p < 0.00001; MD = -2.00, 95% CI (-2.94, -1.06), p < 0.0001 at treatment duration of 3 and 4 months, respectively], NIHSS [MD = -2.48, 95% CI (-4.97, 0.00), p = 0.05; MD = -3.81, 95% CI (-6.21, -1.40), p = 0.002 at treatment duration of <3 and 3 months, respectively], and CSS [MD = -2.47, 95% CI (-3.49, -1.45), p < 0.00001 at a treatment duration of 3 months]. No serious adverse reactions were observed. Conclusion: Despite the significant positive results, the present evidence supports, to a limited extent because of the methodological flaws and herbal heterogeneity, that TCM adjuvant therapy can be used for patients with PSCI. While, further rigorous RCTs are warranted to confirm the efficacy and safety of TCM. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero, identifier CRD42020149299.

Project description:BackgroundTrials on sling exercise (SE), commonly performed to manage chronic low back pain (LBP), yield conflicting results. This study aimed to review the effects of SE on chronic LBP.MethodsThe randomized controlled trials comparing SE with other treatments or no treatment, published up to August 2013, were identified by electronic searches. Primary outcomes were pain, function, and return to work. The weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated, using a random-effects model.ResultsRisk of bias was rated as high in 9 included trials, where some important quality components such as blinding were absent and sample sizes were generally small. We found no clinically relevant differences in pain or function between SE and other forms of exercise, traditional Chinese medical therapy, or in addition to acupuncture. Based on two trials, SE was more effective than thermomagnetic therapy at reducing pain (short-term: WMD -13.90, 95% CI -22.19 to -5.62; long-term: WMD -26.20, 95% CI -31.32 to -21.08) and improving function (short-term: WMD -10.54, 95% CI -14.32 to -6.75; long-term: WMD -25.75, 95% CI -30.79 to -20.71). In one trial we found statistically significant differences between SE and physical agents combined with drug therapy (meloxicam combined with eperisone hydrochloride) but of borderline clinical relevance for pain (short-term: WMD -15.00, 95% CI -19.64 to -10.36) and function (short-term: WMD -10.00; 95% CI -13.70 to -6.30). There was substantial heterogeneity among the two trials comparing SE and thermomagnetic therapy; both these trials and the trial comparing SE with physical agents combined with drug therapy had serious methodological limitations.InterpretationBased on limited evidence from 2 trials, SE was more effective for LBP than thermomagnetic therapy. Clinically relevant differences in effects between SE and other forms of exercise, physical agents combined with drug therapy, traditional Chinese medical therapy, or in addition to acupuncture could not be found. More high-quality randomized trials on the topic are warranted.

Dataset Information

Traditional Chinese medicine for neck pain and low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Publications

Traditional Chinese medicine for neck pain and low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets