Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 14 de 14
Filter
1.
EuropePMC; 2020.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-315937

ABSTRACT

Background: Since the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in January 2020, Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) has been fully and deeply involved in the treatment of COVID-19 in China. An increasing number of clinical trials has been registered to evaluate the effects of TCM in the prevention and therapeutic management of COVID-19. Objective: This study aims to review the existing TCM registered trials, identify promising and available TCM therapies, in order to provide reference for the global management of COVID-19. Methods: : All clinical trials on TCM for COVID-19 registered in eight registry platforms worldwide were searched up to May 14, 2020. The data of registration trend, design, objective, interventions, current status, and relevant information were reviewed and summarized. Supportive information on the progress, results and potential value of the included registered trials were searched and reviewed from databases and official websites. Results: : 161 TCM trials registered in three registries from January 26 to May 14 were included. 94 (58.4%) were randomized controlled trials, followed by controlled clinical trials (25, 15.5%), single-arm clinical studies (18, 11.2%) and others (24, 14.9%). 114 trials (70.8%) assessed therapeutic effects;while the remaining were for prevention, rehabilitation, and TCM syndrome epidemiology. The three most evaluated TCM interventions were Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) in the preparation forms of formulae decoction/granule (41.7%), Chinese patent medicine (24.8%) and Chinese herbal-derived injections (8.1%). The common outcomes in therapeutic trials were symptoms and signs (65.8%), time to viral clearance on PCR (50.9%), and improvement in CT images (43.9%). 78 trials (48.4%) had started recruiting and six trials (3.7%) had completed recruiting. Among the TCM interventions identified from the registered trials, the following are worthy of attention and may have the potential feasibility of being evaluated and then used worldwide due to their rigorous design, previous evidence and availability: for prevention in high-risk populations or suspected cases, moxibustion, Huoxiang Zhengqi pill and Jinye Baidu granule could be considered;for treatment, Qingfei Paidu decoction or granules in mild, moderate and severe cases, Huashi Baidu decoction, Lianhua Qingwen caplsule, Toujie Quwen granule and Xiyanping injection in mild and moderate cases, and Xuebijing injection in severe cases could be considered. For rehabilitation of cured patients, the effect of Tai Chi and Liuzijue on the patients’ lung function and quality of life deserves attention. Conclusion: A series of promising potentially effective TCM interventions including CHM formulae, Chinese patent medicines, herbal-derived injections and non-drug therapies have been identified in clinical practice and are being evaluated by registered clinical trials. Available and applicable interventions within relevant trials are worthy of worldwide attention and application, in order to contribute to the global management of COVID-19 epidemic.

2.
EuropePMC; 2020.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-324487

ABSTRACT

Background: The World Health Organization characterized the 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) as a pandemic on March 11. Many clinical trials on COVID-19 have been registered, and we aim to review the characteristics of the trials and provide guidance for future trials to avoid duplicated effort. Methods All the studies on COVID-19 registered before Mar 3, 2020 on eight registry platforms worldwide were searched and the data of design, participants, interventions, and outcomes were extracted and analyzed. The most promising trials were screened based on study design, rationale, and resource availability. Results 393 studies registered were identified until Mar 3 2020 and 380 (96.7%) studies were from mainland China, while 3 in Japan, 3 in France, 2 in the US, and 3 were international collaborative studies. 363 studies (92.4%) recruited participants from hospitals and 266 studies (67.7%) aimed at therapeutic effect, others were for prevention, diagnosis, prognosis, etc. 202 studies (51.4%) were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The average sample size was 1061 and ranged from 8 to 150,000 per study. 177 out of 266 therapeutic studies (66.5% ) tested Western medicines including antiviral drugs (17.7%), stem cell and cord blood therapy (10.2%), chloroquine and derivatives (8.3%), 16 (6.0%) on Chinese medicines, and 73 (27.4%) on integrated therapy of Western and Chinese medicines. 14 Chinese medicines had its clear rationale for evaluation of therapeutic effects. 31 studies among 266 therapeutic studies (11.7%) used mortality as primary outcome, while the most designed secondary outcomes were symptoms and signs (47.0%). 106 studies (27.0%) were funded by the government, and 268 (68.2%) demonstrated ethical approval. 45.5% studies (179 out of 266) had not started recruiting till Mar 3. Eight RCTs were evaluated as the most promising trials. Conclusions Majority of the studies focused on assessing therapeutics for COVID-19 but inappropriate outcome setting, delayed recruitment and insufficient numbers of new cases in China implied many studies may fail to complete. Strategies and protocols of the studies with robust and rapid data sharing from international collaboration are warranted for emergency public health events, helping to accelerate priority setting for timely evidence-based decision-making.

3.
Integr Med Res ; 10: 100798, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1472010

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We aimed to investigate use of infection control behaviours, preventative and therapeutic interventions, and outcomes among respondents to an online survey during the COVID-19 pandemic in China. METHODS: The survey was designed by an international team, translated and adapted to simplified Chinese, including 132 kinds of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) preparation recommended by guidelines. It was distributed and collected from February to May 2021, with data analysed by WPS spreadsheet and wjx.cn. Descriptive statistics were used to describe demographics and clinical characteristics, diagnosis, treatments, preventative behaviours and interventions, and their associated outcomes. RESULTS: The survey was accessed 503 times with 341 (67.8%) completions covering 23 provinces and four municipalities in China. Most (282/341, 82.7%) respondents reported no symptoms during the pandemic and the majority (290/341, 85.0%) reported having a SARS-CoV-2 PCR test at some point. Forty-five (13.2%) reported having a respiratory infection, among which 19 (42.2%) took one or more categories of modern medicine, e.g. painkillers, antibiotics; 16 (35.6%) used TCM interventions(s); while seven respondents combined TCM with modern medicine. All respondents reported using at least one behavioural or medical approach to prevention, with 22.3% taking TCM and 5.3% taking modern medicines. No respondents reported having a critical condition related to COVID-19. CONCLUSION: We found evidence of widespread use of infection control behaviours, modern medicines and TCM for treatment and prevention of COVID-19 and other respiratory symptoms. Larger scale studies are warranted, including a more representative sample exploring TCM preparations recommended in clinical guidelines.

4.
Front Psychol ; 12: 645460, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1268290

ABSTRACT

Objectives: The corona virus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic spread globally, and we aimed to investigate the psychosocial impact on healthcare workers (HWs) in China during the pandemic. Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched seven electronic databases for cross-sectional studies on psychosocial impact on HWs in relation to COVID-19 from January 1, 2020 to October 7, 2020. We included primary studies involving Chinese HWs during the pandemic, and data were extracted from the published articles. Our primary outcome was prevalence of anxiety, depression, and stress disorders. We pooled prevalence value with their 95% confidence interval using random effect models and assessed study quality on the basis of an 11-item checklist recommended by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020195843). Results: We identified 25 articles comprising a total of 30,841 completed questionnaires and 22 studies for meta-analysis. The prevalence of anxiety, depression, and stress disorders was 34.4% (29.5-39.4%), 31.1% (24.5-37.7%), and 29.1% (24.3-33.8%) for HWs. The pooled prevalence of anxiety disorders for HWs from late January to early February was 46.4% (42.9-49.9%), significantly higher than those in mid-term February (28.0%, 23.9-32.1%) and after late February (27.6%, 16.0-39.2%). The pooled prevalence of depression disorders for HWs from late January to early February was 46.5% (38.8-54.2%), significantly higher than those in mid-term February (27.1%, 19.8-34.5%) and after late February (32.9%, 16.2-49.5%). HWs working in Hubei Province had a higher prevalence of anxiety (37.9 vs. 30.8%) and a lower prevalence of depression (27.5 vs. 34.7%) than those working in other regions. Nurses had a higher prevalence of anxiety (44.1 vs. 29.0%) and depression (34.1 vs. 29.2%) than other HWs. Conclusions: About one-third of HWs in China suffered anxiety, depression, and stress at the early epidemic of COVID-19. HWs in Hubei Province, especially nurses, had a higher prevalence of psychological disorders. During the pandemic, a negative psychological state may persist in a proportion of Chinese HWs, fluctuating with the control of the pandemic. The long-term impact should continue to be observed. Attention should be paid to HWs for their psychological impact due to the pandemic. Systematic Review Registration: The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020195843).

5.
J Affect Disord ; 292: 172-188, 2021 09 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1253104

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to investigate the psychological problems on people infected with SARS-CoV-2 during the pandemic. METHODS: In this living systematic review and meta-analyses, we searched seven electronic databases for cross-sectional studies and longitudinal studies on psychological problems on COVID-19 patients from Jan 1, 2020 to Oct 7, 2020. The primary outcome was prevalence of various psychological problems such as anxiety, depression, stress, insomnia, somatization, and fear. We pooled data for prevalence with their 95% confidence interval (CI) using random effect models and assessed the study quality based on the 11-item checklist recommended by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. RESULTS: Fourty-four studies, including studies from China(35), Italy(2), Iran(2), India(1), Korea(1), Ecuador(1), Switzerland(1), Germany(1), were identified by comprising a total of 8587 completed questionnaires and 38 studies for meta-analyses. The prevalence of anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder(PTSD), insomnia, somatization, and fear in patients with COVID-19 was 16.6% (10.1%-23.1%), 37.7% (29.3%-46.2%), 41.5% (9.3%-73.7%), 68.3% (48.6%-88.0%), 36.5% (20.2%-52.8%), 47.6% (9.4%-85.7%), respectively. The prevalence of anxiety, depression, and insomnia in severe COVID-19 patients (intensive care unit inpatients) was higher than mild or clinically stable COVID-19 patients. LIMITATIONS: A significant degree of heterogeneity in terms of populations, sampling methods, scales was noted across studies. CONCLUSIONS: There existed high proportions of COVID-19 patients with psychological problem. The prevalence of psychological problems was closely related to the patients themselves, their surroundings and social support. It is imperative to provide ontime psychological care service for COVID-19 patients and to follow-up them for a longer period.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Mental Health , Stress, Psychological , Anxiety , COVID-19/psychology , China , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression , Germany , Humans , India , Iran , Italy , Prevalence , Republic of Korea , SARS-CoV-2 , Switzerland
6.
Complement Ther Med ; 60: 102744, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1252645

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Chinese patent medicine (CPM) is an indispensable part of traditional Chinese medicine. Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) manifests is an acute respiratory infectious disease. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the therapeutic effects and safety of oral CPM for COVID-19. METHODS: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that tested oral CPM for the treatment of COVID-19 identified from publications in CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, Web of Science, SinoMed, PubMed, Embase, BioRxiv, MedRxiv and arXiv before November 2nd, 2020. The risk of bias for each trial was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0. RevMan 5.4 software was used for data analyses. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using the online GRADEpro tool. RESULTS: Seven RCTs including 1079 participants were identified. The overall bias was assessed as "-high risk of bias" for all included trials. Oral CPM investigated were: Lianhua Qingwen capsule/granules (LHQW), Jinhua Qinggan granules (JHQG), Huoxiang Zhengqi dripping pills (HXZQ), Toujie Quwen granules (TJQW) and Lianhua Qingke granules (LHQK). Compared with conventional western therapy alone for people with COVID-19: regarding the main outcomes, the results showed that oral CPM combined with conventional western therapy improved cure rate (RR = 1.20, 95 % CI 1.04-1.38, involving LHQW and TJQW), reduced aggravation rate (RR = 0.50, 95 % CI 0.29 - 0.85, involving LHQW, JHQG, LHQK and TJQW); with regard to additional outcomes, the results showed that add-on oral CPM shortened the duration of fever, cough and fatigue, improved the recovery rate of cough and fatigue, and increased the improvement and recovery rate of chest CT manifestations. There were some differences in therapeutic effects among various CPMs for the same COVID-19 outcome. The use of TJQW and LHQG appeared not to increase the risk of adverse events, but JHQG may cause mild diarrhea. CONCLUSION: Low-certainty or very low-certainty evidence demonstrated that oral CPM may have add-on potential therapeutic effects for patients with non-serious COVID-19. These findings need to be further confirmed by well-designed clinical trials with adequate sample sizes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Drugs, Chinese Herbal/therapeutic use , Medicine, Chinese Traditional , Nonprescription Drugs/administration & dosage , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , SARS-CoV-2 , Administration, Oral , Bias , Humans
7.
Front Pharmacol ; 11: 583450, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1133942

ABSTRACT

Objective: To present the evidence of the therapeutic effects and safety of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) used with or without conventional western therapy for COVID-19. Methods: Clinical studies on the therapeutic effects and safety of CHM for COVID-19 were included. We summarized the general characteristics of included studies, evaluated methodological quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, analyzed the use of CHM, used Revman 5.4 software to present the risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) and their 95% confidence interval (CI) to estimate the therapeutic effects and safety of CHM. Results: A total of 58 clinical studies were identified including RCTs (17.24%, 10), non-randomized controlled trials (1.72%, 1), retrospective studies with a control group (18.97%, 11), case-series (20.69%, 12) and case-reports (41.38%, 24). No RCTs of high methodological quality were identified. The most frequently tested oral Chinese patent medicine, Chinese herbal medicine injection or prescribed herbal decoction were: Lianhua Qingwen granule/capsule, Xuebijing injection and Maxing Shigan Tang. In terms of aggravation rate, pooled analyses showed that there were statistical differences between the intervention group and the comparator group (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.82, six RCTs; RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.64, five retrospective studies with a control group), that is, CHM plus conventional western therapy appeared better than conventional western therapy alone in reducing aggravation rate. In addition, compared with conventional western therapy, CHM plus conventional western therapy had potential advantages in increasing the recovery rate and shortening the duration of fever, cough and fatigue, improving the negative conversion rate of nucleic acid test, and increasing the improvement rate of chest CT manifestations and shortening the time from receiving the treatment to the beginning of chest CT manifestations improvement. For adverse events, pooled data showed that there were no statistical differences between the CHM and the control groups. Conclusion: Current low certainty evidence suggests that there maybe a tendency that CHM plus conventional western therapy is superior to conventional western therapy alone. The use of CHM did not increase the risk of adverse events.

8.
Eur J Integr Med ; 41: 101251, 2021 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1065082

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) has been fully committed to the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China. An increasing number of clinical trials have been registered to evaluate the effects of TCM for COVID-19. The aim of this study was to review the existing TCM clinical trial registrations and identify potentially promising and available TCM therapies, in order to provide a reference for the global management of COVID-19. METHODS: All clinical trials on TCM for COVID-19 registered in registry platforms worldwide were searched. The data of registration temporal trend, design, objective, interventions, and relevant information were reviewed and summarized. RESULTS: 161 TCM trials were identified from three registries (January 26 to May 14 2020,). Of these, 94 (58.4%) were randomized controlled trials and 114 trials (70.8%) assessed therapeutic effects; while the remainder focused on prevention, rehabilitation, and the epidemiology of TCM syndromes. Eight trials (5.0%) had completed their recruitment. TCM interventions with potential for further evaluation in terms of prevention were moxibustion, Huoxiang Zhengqi pill and Jinye Baidu granules. For treatment of COVID-19, Qingfei Paidu decoction, Huashi Baidu decoction, Lianhua Qingwen capsules, Toujie Quwen granules and Xiyanping injection, and Xuebijing injection were to be tested for their therapeutic effects and symptoms relief. For rehabilitation, Tai Chi and Liuzijue were to be tested for improving patients' lung function. CONCLUSION: Some potentially promising TCM interventions have been identified and deserve further evaluation to establish their evidence base, particularly on populations outside of China.

9.
SciFinder; 2020.
Preprint | SciFinder | ID: ppcovidwho-5280

ABSTRACT

A review. This report reviewed the treatment of SARS, H1N1 and COVID-19 with traditional Chinese medicine.

11.
Aging (Albany NY) ; 12(11): 10059-10069, 2020 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-459080

ABSTRACT

AIM: To evaluate the clinical value of abnormal laboratory results of multiple organs in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-2019) and to help clinicians perform correct treatment. RESULTS: Elevated neutrophil-to-LYM ratio (NLR), D-dimer(D-D), interleukin (IL)-6, IL-10, IL-2, interferon-Y, and age were significantly associated with the severity of illness. However, significant and sustained decreases were observed in the LYM subset (p<0.05). D-D, T cell counts, and cytokine levels in severe COVID-19 patients who survived the disease gradually recovered at later time points to levels that were comparable to those of mild cases. Second, D-D increased from 0.5 to 8, and the risk ratio increased from 2.75 to 55, eventually leading to disseminated intravascular coagulation. Moreover, the acute renal function damage occurred earlier than abnormal heart and liver functions (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The degrees of lymphopenia and proinflammatory cytokine storm were higher in severe COVID-19 patients than in mild cases. The degree was associated with the disease severity. Advanced age, NLR, D-D, and cytokine levels may serve as useful prognostic factors for the early identification of severe COVID-19 cases. METHODS: Peripheral blood samples were collected from 93 confirmed COVID-19 patients. The samples were examined for lymphocyte (LYM) subsets by flow cytometry and cytokine profiles by specific immunoassays. The receiver operating characteristic curve was applied to determine the best diagnostic thresholds for laboratory results, and principal component analysis was used to screen the major risk factors. The prognostic values were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier curve and univariate and multivariate COX regression models.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/physiology , Coronavirus Infections/blood , Cytokines/blood , Host-Pathogen Interactions , Pneumonia, Viral/blood , Adult , Aged , COVID-19 , China/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/immunology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/immunology , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
12.
Integr Med Res ; 9(3): 100426, 2020 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-324585

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization characterized the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as a pandemic on March 11th. Many clinical trials on COVID-19 have been registered, and we aim to review the study characteristics and provide guidance for future trials to avoid duplicated effort. METHODS: Studies on COVID-19 registered before March 3rd, 2020 on eight registry platforms worldwide were searched and the data of design, participants, interventions, and outcomes were extracted and analyzed. RESULTS: Three hundred and ninety-three studies were identified and 380 (96.7%) were from mainland China, while 3 in Japan, 3 in France, 2 in the US, and 3 were international collaborative studies. Two hundred and sixty-six (67.7%) aimed at therapeutic effect, others were for prevention, diagnosis, prognosis, etc. Two hundred and two studies (51.4%) were randomized controlled trials. Two third of therapeutic studies tested Western medicines including antiviral drugs (17.7%), stem cell and cord blood therapy (10.2%), chloroquine and derivatives (8.3%), 16 (6.0%) on Chinese medicines, and 73 (27.4%) on integrated therapy of Western and Chinese medicines. Thirty-one studies among 266 therapeutic studies (11.7%) used mortality as primary outcome, while the most designed secondary outcomes were symptoms and signs (47.0%). Half of the studies (45.5%) had not started recruiting till March 3rd. CONCLUSION: Inappropriate outcome setting, delayed recruitment and insufficient numbers of new cases in China implied many studies may fail to complete. Strategies and protocols of the studies with robust and rapid data sharing are warranted for emergency public health events, helping the timely evidence-based decision-making.

13.
Int Immunopharmacol ; 84: 106504, 2020 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-76298

ABSTRACT

AIM: To accumulate evidence that indicated the key role played by virus-triggered inflammation in the 2019-novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) which emerged in Wuhan City and rapidly spread throughout China. METHODS: Age, neutrophil(NEU)-to-lymphocyte (LYM) ratio (NLR), lymphocyte-to-monocyte (MON) ratio, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), and C-reactive protein (CRP) of 93 patients with laboratory confirmed COVID-19 were investigated and compared. The receiver operating characteristic curve was applied to determine the thresholds for five bio-markers, and their prognostic values were assessed via the Kaplan-Meier curve and multivariate COX regression models. RESULTS: The median age was 46.4 years old, and 37cases were females. A total of 27.8% of patients had been to Wuhan, and 73.1% had contacted with people from Wuhan. Fever (83.8%) and cough (70.9%) were the two most common symptoms. Elevated NLR and age were significantly associated with illness severity. The binary logistic analysis identified elevated NLR (hazard risk [HR] 2.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.98-4.57) and age (HR 2.52, 95% CI 1.65-4.83) as independent factors for poor clinical outcome of COVID-19. NLR exhibited the largest area under the curve at 0.841, with the highest specificity (63.6%) and sensitivity (88%). CONCLUSIONS: Elevated age and NLR can be considered independent biomarkers for indicating poor clinical outcomes.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Blood Platelets/physiology , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Lymphocytes/physiology , Monocytes/physiology , Neutrophils/physiology , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Adult , C-Reactive Protein/analysis , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/blood , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/pathology , Epidemics , Female , Humans , Lymphocyte Count , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/blood , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/pathology , Prognosis , ROC Curve , SARS-CoV-2
14.
Chin J Integr Med ; 26(4): 243-250, 2020 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1125

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Since December 2019, an outbreak of corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) occurred in Wuhan, and rapidly spread to almost all parts of China. This was followed by prevention programs recommending Chinese medicine (CM) for the prevention. In order to provide evidence for CM recommendations, we reviewed ancient classics and human studies. METHODS: Historical records on prevention and treatment of infections in CM classics, clinical evidence of CM on the prevention of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and H1N1 influenza, and CM prevention programs issued by health authorities in China since the COVID-19 outbreak were retrieved from different databases and websites till 12 February, 2020. Research evidence included data from clinical trials, cohort or other population studies using CM for preventing contagious respiratory virus diseases. RESULTS: The use of CM to prevent epidemics of infectious diseases was traced back to ancient Chinese practice cited in Huangdi's Internal Classic (Huang Di Nei Jing) where preventive effects were recorded. There were 3 studies using CM for prevention of SARS and 4 studies for H1N1 influenza. None of the participants who took CM contracted SARS in the 3 studies. The infection rate of H1N1 influenza in the CM group was significantly lower than the non-CM group (relative risk 0.36, 95% confidence interval 0.24-0.52; n=4). For prevention of COVID-19, 23 provinces in China issued CM programs. The main principles of CM use were to tonify qi to protect from external pathogens, disperse wind and discharge heat, and resolve dampness. The most frequently used herbs included Radix astragali (Huangqi), Radix glycyrrhizae (Gancao), Radix saposhnikoviae (Fangfeng), Rhizoma Atractylodis Macrocephalae (Baizhu), Lonicerae Japonicae Flos (Jinyinhua), and Fructus forsythia (Lianqiao). CONCLUSIONS: Based on historical records and human evidence of SARS and H1N1 influenza prevention, Chinese herbal formula could be an alternative approach for prevention of COVID-19 in high-risk population. Prospective, rigorous population studies are warranted to confirm the potential preventive effect of CM.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Drugs, Chinese Herbal/therapeutic use , Epidemics , Medicine, Chinese Traditional , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Astragalus propinquus , COVID-19 , Clinical Trials as Topic , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Epidemics/history , Epidemics/prevention & control , History, Ancient , Humans , Infection Control/history , Infection Control/methods , Influenza A Virus, H1N1 Subtype , Influenza, Human/therapy , Medicine, Chinese Traditional/history , Medicine, Chinese Traditional/methods , Pandemics , Qi , SARS-CoV-2 , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/therapy
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL