中医药治疗盆腔瘀血综合征系统评价

Traditional Chinese Medicine Treatment of Pelvic Congestion Syndrome System Evaluation

摘要:

目的: 对中医药治疗盆腔瘀血综合征(PCS)的临床研究进行系统评价和Meta分析,了解中医药治疗PCS的临床效果,从而指导临床中医药治疗盆腔瘀血综合征的应用。方法: 按照循证医学的原则和方法,通过计算机和手工检索近20年来中医药治疗盆腔瘀血综合征的随机对照文献,对纳入的文献进行系统评价并进行Meta分析。结果: 纳入17篇文献, 3篇采用随机数字表分组的方法,3篇采用门诊就诊顺序的半随机分组;仅有1篇采用单盲;1篇有明确的纳入和排除标准;8篇有具体的统计学方法,有具体的统计量和P;5篇提到随访;所有文献均未描述退出与失访病例;3篇提及了对不良反应的观察;所有文献都未描述是否实施分配方案的隐匿;方法学质量评分,3个为2分,其余均为1分。Meta分析结果显示:中医药对本病的疗效与西医比较有一定的优势,中西医结合治疗优于单纯西药疗效,不同中药的疗效有差异性。结论: 中医药治疗研究质量有待进一步提高。Meta分析显示中医药治疗PCS较西医有一定优势,不同中医药的疗效也有差异,但肯定的疗效证据强度不够,需高质量、大样本、多中心的随机对照试验的进一步证实。

Abstract:

Objective: To investigate the treatment of traditional Chinese medicine pelvic congestion syndrome (PCS) of clinical research on system evaluation and Meta analysis, to understand the clinical effect of traditional Chinese medicine treatment of PCS, so as to guide clinical traditional Chinese medicine treatment of pelvic congestion syndrome application. Method: According to the principle of evidence-based medicine and methods, through the computer and manual retrieval in the recent 20 years of traditional Chinese medicine to pelvic congestion syndrome of randomized controlled literatures, in the literature evaluation system and Meta analysis. Result: Into 17 articles, 3 article using table of random number grouping method, 3 article using the order of clinic on a half random grouping. Only 1 article by a single blind. 1 article clear into and exclusion standard. Article 8 a specific statistical methods, there are specific statistics and value. Five articles mentioned follow-up. All documents were not describe exit and lost to follow-up cases. 3 article mentioned the adverse reaction of observation. All documents do not describe whether to implement scheme of hiding. Methodological quality score, 3 to 2 points, the others all is 1 minute. Meta analysis results showed that the curative effect of traditional Chinese medicine of the comparison with western medicine has a certain advantage, combining traditional Chinese and western medicine treatment is superior to pure western medicine curative effect, the effect of different Chinese traditional medicine have difference. Conclusion: The quality of traditional Chinese medicine to study further improve. Meta analysis showed that traditional Chinese medicine treatment of PCS is western medicine have certain advantages, the effect of different traditional Chinese medicine also has difference, it is a kind of promising treatments. But certain curative effect evidence strength is not enough, should be high quality, large sample, multicenter randomized controlled trial of further confirmed.