Dataset Information

Comparative Effectiveness of Western and Eastern Manual Therapies for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Manual therapy (MT) is considered a promising adjuvant therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Comparing the effectiveness among different Western and Eastern MTs being used for the management of COPD could potentially facilitate individualized management of COPD. This systematic review attempted to estimate the comparative effectiveness of Western and Eastern MTs for COPD patients using a network meta-analysis (NMA) methodology.

Methods

Nine electronic databases were comprehensively searched for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to February 2021. Pair-wise meta-analysis and NMA were conducted on the outcomes of COPD, which included lung function and exercise capacity.

Results

The NMA results from 30 included RCTs indicated that the optimal treatment for each outcome according to the surface under the cumulative ranking curve was massage, acupressure, massage, and tuina for forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC), FEV1/FVC, and 6 min walking distance, respectively.

Conclusions

MTs such as massage, acupressure, and tuina have shown comparative benefits for lung function and exercise capacity in COPD. However, the methodological quality of the included studies was poor, and the head-to-head trial comparing the effects of different types of MTs for COPD patients was insufficient. Therefore, further high-quality RCTs are essential.

SUBMITTER: Kwon CY

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8467771 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients with exacerbations despite optimized bronchodilator therapy, roflumilast and chronic azithromycin are recommended options. Roflumilast is recommended in severe COPD patients with chronic bronchitis, whereas chronic azithromycin is more broadly indicated. The comparative effectiveness between these 2 treatments to reduce exacerbation rate remains unclear.ObjectivesOur objective was analysis of the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) database (medication and claims data without lung function or presence of chronic bronchitis or tobacco use) to compare the effectiveness of roflumilast and azithromycin on hospitalizations and mortality.MethodsThe primary outcome of the study was cumulative incidences of first COPD-related and all-cause hospitalization. Sensitivity analysis on hospitalizations was conducted for VHA patients who also had Medicare.ResultsIn 1302 roflumilast and 2573 azithromycin patients, the all-cause mortality rates at 1 year were 19% and 15%, respectively. The median times-to-all-cause death were 47 months (interquartile range [IQR] 16-81) for the roflumilast and 48 months (IQR 20-83) for the azithromycin groups. Roflumilast was associated with higher mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 1.16; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.29). Roflumilast showed no significant association for COPD-related hospitalization (subdistribution HR [SHR]=1.14, 95% CI, 1.00-1.29) and all-cause hospitalization (HR 1.07, 95% CI, 0.97-1.18). For patients with Medicare (N=2030), roflumilast was associated with higher COPD-related (SHR 1.21; 95% CI, 1.05-1.41) and all-cause (SHR 1.23; 95% CI, 1.09-1.38) hospitalizations.ConclusionsRoflumilast was associated with higher hazard ratios for death, COPD-related hospitalizations, and all-cause hospitalizations in COPD patients only after adjustment for VHA and external Medicare events. Prospective clinical trials are needed to directly compare the relative efficacy of these therapies.

Project description:BackgroundSix Chinese herb formulas, namely, the Weijing decoction (WJ), the Maxingshigan decoction (MXSG), the Yuebijiabanxia decoction (YBBX), the Qingqihuatan decoction (QQHT), the Dingchuan decoction (DC) and the Sangbaipi decoction (SBP), are commonly used, along with routine pharmacotherapy, to manage the acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD). In this study, we conducted a systematic review to summarize the efficacy of these six formulas, and we also conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) to rank these formulas.MethodsWe searched five English databases and four Chinese databases, with dates ranging from the starting dates of these databases to December 2016. Randomized controlled trials that evaluated any of the six Chinese herb formulas combined with the use of pharmacotherapy for AECOPD were identified.ResultsFifty-five studies involving 4560 participants were included. The pairwise meta-analyses showed that WJ and QQHT had superior effects on the improvement of lung function (forced expiratory volume in 1 seconds; FEV1) (mean difference (MD): 0.25, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.19-0.30 and 0.34, 95%CI: 0.10-0.58). MXSG, WJ and QQHT were found to be more effective for improving arterial blood gases (PaO2 and PaCO2). In terms of effective rates, all of these formulas had additional favourable effects compared to routine pharmacotherapy. The results of the NMA analyses indicated that only MXSG showed superior add-on effects for the improvement of FEV1 (MD: 0.37, 95% credible interval (CrI): 0.03-0.72). Most of the formulas combined with routine pharmacotherapy were superior to pharmacotherapy alone for the improvement of arterial blood gases and effective rates. The ranking tests suggested that QQHT and MXSG combined with routine pharmacotherapy might be optimal options for the treatment of AECOPD.ConclusionsThis NMA indicated that QQHT and MXSG might be more effective treatment regimens for AECOPD. Further well-designed studies that specifically examine the direct comparisons of these formulas are needed to support our conclusions.

Project description:BackgroundHospitalization of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease creates a huge healthcare burden. Positive airway pressure therapy is sometimes used in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, but the possible impact on hospitalization risk remains controversial. We studied the hospitalization risk of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease before and after initiation of various positive airway pressure therapies in a "real-world" bioinformatics study.MethodsWe performed a retrospective analysis of administrative claims data of hospitalizations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease who received or did not receive positive airway pressure therapy: continuous positive airway pressure, bilevel positive airway pressure, and noninvasive positive pressure ventilation using a home ventilator.ResultsThe majority of 1,881,652 patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (92.5%) were not receiving any form of positive airway pressure therapy. Prescription of bilevel positive airway pressure (1.5%), continuous positive airway pressure (5.6%), and noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (<1%) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease demonstrated geographic-, sex-, and age-related variability. After adjusting for confounders and propensity score, noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (odds ratio [OR], 0.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.13-0.27), bilevel positive airway pressure (OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.39-0.45), and continuous positive airway pressure (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.67-0.72) were individually associated with lower hospitalization risk in the 6 months post-treatment when compared with the 6 months pretreatment but not when compared with the baseline period between 12 and 6 months before treatment initiation. Stratified analysis suggests that comorbid sleep-disordered breathing, chronic respiratory failure, heart failure, and age less than 65 years were associated with greater benefits from positive airway pressure therapy.ConclusionInitiation of positive airway pressure therapy was associated with reduction in hospitalization among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, but the causality needs to be determined by randomized controlled trials.