RESUMO
OBJECTIVE@#To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of Chinese herbs in the treatment of sub-health systematically.@*METHODS@#Nine databases were systematically and extensively searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about Chinese herbs in the treatment of sub-health. The outcomes included overall effective rate, main symptoms, quality of life, etc. Literature screening, data extraction and quality assessment were conducted according to Cochrane Handbook 5.1. Meta-analysis was conducted to the included literature with Review Manager Software.@*RESULTS@#Seventy-two studies involving 9,296 patients with sub-health were included with 4,908 patients in experimental groups and 4,387 patients in control groups. The overall quality of included clinical research was not high. In the aspect of improving overall effective rate, relieving main symptoms, Pittsburgh sleep quality index (PSQI) score, Athens Insomnia Scale (AIS) score, Fatigue Scale-14 (FS-14), Cornell Medical Index (CMI) score and discontinuation rate, the effects of experimental groups were better than that of control groups. According to available research reports, adverse reactions in Chinese herb groups were mainly mild gastrointestinal symptoms, which did not affect the treatment.@*CONCLUSION@#Chinese herbs have a curative effect in the treatment of sub-health. However, there are no clear criteria for diagnosis and curative effectiveness judgment globally, which would affect the accuracy of curative effect evaluation.
RESUMO
To evaluate the methodological quality of the randomized controlled trials(RCTs) for traditional Chinese medicines for treatment of sub-health, in order to provide a scientific basis for the improvement of clinical trials and systematic review. Such databases as CNKI, CBM, VIP, Wanfang, EMbase, Medline, Clinical Trials, Web of Science and Cochrane Library were searched for RCTS for traditional Chinese medicines for treatment of sub-health between the time of establishment and February 29, 2016. Cochrane Handbook 5.1 was used to screen literatures and extract data, and CONSORT statement and CONSORT for traditional Chinese medicine statement were adopted as the basis for quality evaluation. Among the 72 RCTs included in this study, 67 (93.05%) trials described the inter-group baseline data comparability, 39(54.17%) trials described the unified diagnostic criteria, 28(38.89%) trials described the unified standards of efficacy, 4 (5.55%) trials mentioned the multi-center study, 19(26.38%) trials disclosed the random distribution method, 6(8.33%) trials used the random distribution concealment, 15(20.83%) trials adopted the method of blindness, 3(4.17%) study reported the sample size estimation in details, 5 (6.94%) trials showed a sample size of more than two hundred, 19(26.38%) trials reported the number of withdrawal, defluxion cases and those lost to follow-up, but only 2 trials adopted the ITT analysis,10(13.89%) trials reported the follow-up results, none of the trial reported the test registration and the test protocol, 48(66.7%) trials reported all of the indicators of expected outcomes, 26(36.11%) trials reported the adverse reactions and adverse events, and 4(5.56%) trials reported patient compliance. The overall quality of these randomized controlled trials for traditional Chinese medicines for treatment of sub-health is low, with methodological defects in different degrees. Therefore, it is still necessary to emphasize the correct application of principles such as blindness, randomization and control in RCTs, while requiring reporting in accordance with international standards.