Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
J Integr Med ; 20(5): 416-426, 2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1907343

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a rapidly spreading disease that has caused an extensive burden to the world. Consequently, a large number of clinical trials have examined the efficacy of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) for treating and preventing COVID-19, with coinciding proliferation of reviews summarizing these studies. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the methodological quality and evidence quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the efficacy of TCM. SEARCH STRATEGY: Seven electronic databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chongqing VIP, Wanfang Data and SinoMed, were searched for systematic reviews and meta-analyses in October 2021. Search terms such as "Chinese medicine," "Lianhua Qingwen" and "COVID-19" were used. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials that evaluated the efficacy of TCM treatment of COVID-19 were included. DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS: A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews Version 2.0 (AMSTAR 2) was used to evaluate the methodological quality. The quality of evidence was graded using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Data extraction and analysis were performed by two reviewers independently. RESULTS: There were 17 meta-analyses included in our overview. The intervention group was defined as TCM combined with Western medicine, while the control group was Western medicine alone. The methodological quality of all the included studies was moderate to poor. A total of 89 outcome indicators were evaluated, of which, 8 were rated as moderate quality, 39 as low quality, and 41 as very low quality. Only one outcome measure was graded as being of high quality. The moderate quality of evidence indicated that, for the treatment of COVID-19, the clinical efficacy of TCM in combination with Western medicine was better, in terms of lung recovery, rate of conversion to severe/critical cases, symptom scores, duration of symptoms, mortality, and length of hospital stay. CONCLUSION: Evidence from the included studies shows that, compared with conventional Western medical therapy alone, the addition of TCM to COVID-19 treatment may improve clinical outcomes. Overall, the quality of evidence of TCM for COVID-19 was moderate to poor. Meta-analyses of the use of TCM in the treatment of COVID-19 can be used for clinical decision making by accounting for the experiences of clinical experts, medical policies, and other factors.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Drugs, Chinese Herbal , Drugs, Chinese Herbal/therapeutic use , Humans , Medicine, Chinese Traditional , Meta-Analysis as Topic , Systematic Reviews as Topic , Treatment Outcome
2.
Int J Infect Dis ; 116: 210-215, 2022 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1683186

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak is currently ravaging populations worldwide. Many studies were registered and conducted in rapid response to the epidemic, but how to choose the proper design for clinical trials remains the main concern. This study aimed to determine the fundamental characteristics of study design during the COVID-19 pandemic and provide references for other emerging infectious diseases. METHODS: We searched the database of ClinicalTrials.gov with the keyword "COVID-19" and compared the results with the design features of other conventional studies except for COVID-19. RESULTS: From January 1, 2020 to September 30, 2021, 55,334 trials were registered at ClinicalTrials.gov. Of all the registered trials, 6,408 were related to COVID-19 (11.58%). There were significant differences in the proportion of observational studies between COVID-19 (43.48%) and others (23.27%). The completion rate of observational trials and interventional trials in COVID-19 was 29.04% and 25.84%, respectively. COVID-19 trials showed a higher rate of completion than others (P<0.01). The time distribution and trend of observational studies and interventional studies varied considerably. CONCLUSION: Appropriately designed trials can help to improve research efficiency and reduce the possibility of research failure. In addition to randomized controlled trials, observational and single-armed studies are also worth considering.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Clinical Trials as Topic , Pandemics , COVID-19/epidemiology , Clinical Trials as Topic/methods , Databases, Factual , Humans , Research Design , SARS-CoV-2
3.
Am J Chin Med ; 50(2): 333-349, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1673506

ABSTRACT

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of traditional Chinese medicine for COVID-19 treatment with a focus on the benefits of symptomatic relief and time-related indexes. Seven electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chongqing VIP, Wanfang Data, and Chinese Clinical Trial Registry) were systematically searched from their beginning to April 2021. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing patients using Western therapy (WT) alone and those using additional Chinese medicine (WT [Formula: see text] CM) were included. Primary outcomes included overall efficacy, lung recovery, and time to viral assay conversion. Secondary outcomes included time and rate of individual symptom recovery, laboratory indicators, and adverse events. Overall, 15 RCTs, including 1469 participants, were included in this review. WT [Formula: see text] CM significantly improved overall efficacy (risk ratio, RR [Formula: see text] 1.21; 95% CI: 1.12 to 1.30; [Formula: see text] [Formula: see text] 0.01) and lung recovery (RR [Formula: see text] 1.30; 95% CI:1.19 to 1.42; [Formula: see text] [Formula: see text] 0.01) and shortened the time to viral assay conversion (weighted mean differences, WMD [Formula: see text]1.38; 95% CI: -1.98 to -0.78; [Formula: see text] [Formula: see text] 0.01) and duration of chest distress (WMD [Formula: see text] 2.41; 95% CI: -2.99 to -1.83; [Formula: see text] [Formula: see text] 0.01) compared to WT alone. There was no difference in safety between the WT [Formula: see text] CM and WT groups (RR [Formula: see text] 0.94; 95% CI: 0.64 to 1.39; [Formula: see text] 0.76). In conclusion, the synthesized evidence from 15 RCTs showed that additional Chinese medication may improve treatment efficacy, relieve symptoms, promote lung recovery, and reduce the inflammatory response against COVID-19, while not increasing the risk of adverse events compared with conventional Western medication alone.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Drugs, Chinese Herbal , China , Drugs, Chinese Herbal/adverse effects , Humans , Medicine, Chinese Traditional , Treatment Outcome
4.
International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases ; 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1615430

ABSTRACT

Background and Objective The outbreak of the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is currently ravaging worldwide. A large number of studies were registered and conducted in rapid response to the epidemic, but how to choose the proper design for clinical trials still remains the main concern. This study aimed to determine fundamental characteristics of study design during the COVID-19 epidemic and provide references for other emerging infectious diseases. Methods We searched the database of ClinicalTrials.gov with the keyword 'COVID-19′ and compared them with the design features of other conventional studies except for COVID-19. Results From January 1, 2020 to September 30, 2021, 55 334 trials were registered at ClinicalTrials.gov. Of all the registered trials, 6408 were related to COVID-19(11.58%). There were significant differences in the proportion of observational studies between COVID-19 (43.48%) and others (23.27%). The completion rate of observational trials and interventional trials in COVID-19 was 29.04% and 25.84%, respectively. COVID-19 trials showed a higher rate of completion than others (P<0.01). The time distribution and trend of observational studies and interventional studies varied considerably. Conclusion Appropriately designed trials can help to improve research efficiency and reduce the possibility of research failure. In addition to randomized controlled trials, observational and single-armed studies are also worth considering.

5.
Ieee Computational Intelligence Magazine ; 15(4):62-73, 2020.
Article in English | Web of Science | ID: covidwho-917729

ABSTRACT

Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) has played an important role in the prevention and control of the novel coronavirus pneumonia (COVID-19), and community prevention has become the most essential part in reducing the risk of spread and protecting public health. However, most communities use a unified TCM prevention program for all residents, which violates the "treatment based on syndrome differentiation" principle of TCM and limits the effectiveness of prevention. In this paper, we propose an intelligent optimization method to develop diversified TCM prevention programs for community residents. First, we use a fuzzy clustering method to divide the population based on both modern medicine and TCM health characteristics;we then use an interactive optimization method, in which TCM experts develop different TCM prevention programs for different clusters, and a heuristic algorithm is used to optimize the programs under the resource constraints. We demonstrate the computational efficiency of the proposed method, and report the application results of the method in TCM-based prevention of COVID-19 in 12 communities in Zhejiang province, China, during the peak of the pandemic.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL