Dataset Information

Fennel for Reducing Pain in Primary Dysmenorrhea: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

ABSTRACT: Fennel is used as an alternative treatment for primary dysmenorrhea. This review aims to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of fennel for reducing pain in primary dysmenorrhea. Twenty databases, including English, Korean, Chinese, Japanese, Iranian, and Spanish databases, were searched from inception to 20 October 2020. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effectiveness of fennel for treating primary dysmenorrhea were considered. Two reviewers conducted the data extraction and risk of bias assessment independently. Any discrepancies were resolved through discussion with a third reviewer. A total of 12 studies were included in this review. The pooled results of seven trials showed that the effect of fennel is similar to that of conventional drug therapies in alleviating pain (n = 502, standardized mean difference (SMD): 0.07, 95% confidence interval(CI): -0.08 to 0.21, p < 0.37, I² = 0%). In comparison with placebo, fennel was seen to have favorable effects on reducing pain in primary dysmenorrhea (n = 468, SMD: -3.27, 95% CI: -5.28 to -1.26, p = 0.001, I² = 98%). Only three studies assessed adverse events (AEs), and one study reported minor AEs. Although the risk of bias for all the included studies was moderate, potential publication bias was observed due to the presence of a greater number of small studies with favorable effects. This systematic review concludes that fennel is as effective as conventional drug therapies in alleviating pain in primary dysmenorrhea. More studies that include more diverse populations and robust evidence of fennel's effects will be needed in future research endeavors.

SUBMITTER: Lee HW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7697926 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Fennel for Reducing Pain in Primary Dysmenorrhea: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Lee Hye Won HW Ang Lin L Lee Myeong Soo MS Alimoradi Zainab Z Kim Eunseop E

Nutrients 20201110 11

Fennel is used as an alternative treatment for primary dysmenorrhea. This review aims to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of fennel for reducing pain in primary dysmenorrhea. Twenty databases, including English, Korean, Chinese, Japanese, Iranian, and Spanish databases, were searched from inception to 20 October 2020. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effectiveness of fennel for treating primary dysmenorrhea were considered. Two reviewers conducted the data extractio ...[more]

PMID: 33182553

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPrimary dysmenorrhea is a condition characterized by painful menstrual cramps that usually occurs in the absence of any identifiable pathological condition among menstruating women, with the prevalence estimates varying between 45% and 95%. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are considered as a standard treatment for primary dysmenorrhea; however, the failure rate of NSAIDs is often 20% to 25% and these drugs commonly cause adverse effects. In this review, we investigated the current evidence related to the effectiveness of Xuefu Zhuyu decoction (XZD) or Hyeolbuchukeo-tang, a traditional herbal formula, as a treatment for primary dysmenorrhea.MethodsLiterature search was conducted about randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for XZD on primary dysmenorrhea. PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure Database, Oriental Medicine Advanced Searching Integrated System, and other Chinese, Korean, Japanese databases were searched up to December 20, 2017. Two independent reviewers extracted and assessed the data. The main outcome domains were visual analogue scale (VAS) score and response rate.ResultsAmong 475 publications, 8 RCTs involving 1048 patients were finally included. Methodological quality of included RCTs was relatively low. In 4 add-on design studies, XZD plus western medication (WM) group showed better response rate as compared to the WM sole therapy (relative risk 1.18, 95% confidence interval [1.11, 1.25], P < .01). VAS score after the 3rd month of treatment in the XZD plus WM group was also lower than that in the WM group (mean difference -0.45, 95% confidence interval [-0.79, -0.12], P < .01). In 4 XZD versus WM design studies, XZD sole therapy showed better response rate than did WM sole therapy (relative risk 1.26, 95% confidence interval [1.06, 1.49], P < .01).ConclusionThe existing trials showed a favorable effect of XZD for the management of primary dysmenorrhea. However, the efficacy of XZD on primary dysmenorrhea is not conclusive owing to the small number of studies and the high risk of bias. Large-scale, long-term RCTs with rigorous methodological input are needed to clarify the role of XZD for the management of primary dysmenorrhea.Trial registration numberCRD42016050447 in PROSPERO 2016.

Project description:BackgroundThough moxibustion is frequently used to treat primary dysmenorrhea in China, relevant evidence supporting its effectiveness is still scanty.MethodsThis study was a pragmatic randomized, conventional drug controlled, open-labeled clinical trial. After initial screen, 152 eligible participants were averagely randomized to receive two different treatment strategies: Moxibustion and conventional drugs. Participants and practitioners were not blinded in this study. The duration of each treatment was 3 months. The primary outcome was pain relief measured by the Visual Analogue Scale. The menstrual pain severity was recorded in a menstrual pain diary.Results152 eligible patients were included but only 133 of them eventually completed the whole treatment course. The results showed that the menstrual pain intensity in experimental group and control group was reduced from 6.38±1.28 and 6.41±1.29, respectively, at baseline, to 2.54±1.41 and 2.47±1.29 after treatment. The pain reduction was not significantly different between these two groups (P = 0.76), however; the pain intensity was significantly reduced relative to baseline for each group (P<0.01). Three months after treatment, the effectiveness of moxibustion sustained and started to be superior to the drug's effect (-0.87, 95%CI -1.32 to -0.42, P<0.01). Secondary outcome analyses showed that moxibustion was as effective as drugs in alleviating menstrual pain-related symptoms. The serum levels of pain mediators, such as PGF2?, OT, vWF, ?-EP, PGE2, were significantly improved after treatment in both groups (P<0.05). No adverse events were reported in this trial.ConclusionsBoth moxibustion and conventional drug showed desirable merits in managing menstrual pain, given their treatment effects and economic costs. This study as a pragmatic trial only demonstrates the effectiveness, not the efficacy, of moxibustion for menstrual pain. It can't rule out the effect of psychological factors during treatment process, because no blind procedure or sham control was used due to availability. In clinical practice, moxibustion should be used at the discretion of patients and their physicians.Trial registrationClinialTrials.gov NCT01972906.

Project description:Osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) is a distinctive modality commonly used by osteopathic physicians to complement their conventional treatment of musculoskeletal disorders. Previous reviews and meta-analyses of spinal manipulation for low back pain have not specifically addressed OMT and generally have focused on spinal manipulation as an alternative to conventional treatment. The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of OMT as a complementary treatment for low back pain.Computerized bibliographic searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, MANTIS, OSTMED, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were supplemented with additional database and manual searches of the literature. Six trials, involving eight OMT vs control treatment comparisons, were included because they were randomized controlled trials of OMT that involved blinded assessment of low back pain in ambulatory settings. Data on trial methodology, OMT and control treatments, and low back pain outcomes were abstracted by two independent reviewers. Effect sizes were computed using Cohen's d statistic and meta-analysis results were weighted by the inverse variance of individual comparisons. In addition to the overall meta-analysis, stratified meta-analyses were performed according to control treatment, country where the trial was conducted, and duration of follow-up. Sensitivity analyses were performed for both the overall and stratified meta-analyses.Overall, OMT significantly reduced low back pain (effect size, -0.30; 95% confidence interval, -0.47 - -0.13; P = .001). Stratified analyses demonstrated significant pain reductions in trials of OMT vs active treatment or placebo control and OMT vs no treatment control. There were significant pain reductions with OMT regardless of whether trials were performed in the United Kingdom or the United States. Significant pain reductions were also observed during short-, intermediate-, and long-term follow-up.OMT significantly reduces low back pain. The level of pain reduction is greater than expected from placebo effects alone and persists for at least three months. Additional research is warranted to elucidate mechanistically how OMT exerts its effects, to determine if OMT benefits are long lasting, and to assess the cost-effectiveness of OMT as a complementary treatment for low back pain.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the proportion of patients with neuropathic pain who achieve a clinically meaningful improvement in their pain with the use of different pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments.Data sourcesMEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and a gray literature search.Study selectionRandomized controlled trials that reported a responder analysis of adults with neuropathic pain-specifically diabetic neuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia, or trigeminal neuralgia-treated with any of the following 8 treatments: exercise, acupuncture, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), topical rubefacients, opioids, anticonvulsant medications, and topical lidocaine.SynthesisA total of 67 randomized controlled trials were included. There was moderate certainty of evidence that anticonvulsant medications (risk ratio of 1.54; 95% CI 1.45 to 1.63; number needed to treat [NNT] of 7) and SNRIs (risk ratio of 1.45; 95% CI 1.33 to 1.59; NNT = 7) might provide a clinically meaningful benefit to patients with neuropathic pain. There was low certainty of evidence for a clinically meaningful benefit for rubefacients (ie, capsaicin; NNT = 7) and opioids (NNT = 8), and very low certainty of evidence for TCAs. Very low-quality evidence demonstrated that acupuncture was ineffective. All drug classes, except TCAs, had a greater likelihood of deriving a clinically meaningful benefit than having withdrawals due to adverse events (number needed to harm between 12 and 15). No trials met the inclusion criteria for exercise or lidocaine, nor were any trials identified for trigeminal neuralgia.ConclusionThere is moderate certainty of evidence that anticonvulsant medications and SNRIs provide a clinically meaningful reduction in pain in those with neuropathic pain, with lower certainty of evidence for rubefacients and opioids, and very low certainty of evidence for TCAs. Owing to low-quality evidence for many interventions, future high-quality trials that report responder analyses will be important to strengthen understanding of the relative benefits and harms of treatments in patients with neuropathic pain.

Dataset Information

Fennel for Reducing Pain in Primary Dysmenorrhea: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Publications

Fennel for Reducing Pain in Primary Dysmenorrhea: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets