Chinese herbal medicine combined with Western medicine for Mycoplasma pneumoniae pneumonia in children:An overview of systematic reviews

Objective:To summarize the characteristics and evaluate the quality of the methodology and evidence within systematic reviews(SRs)of Chinese herbal medicine(CHM)for Mycoplasma pneumoniae pneumonia(MPP)inchildren.Methods:SRs of randomized controlled trials were searched using PubMed,the Cochrane Library,Embase,the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure Databases(CNKI),the Chinese Scientific Journals Database(VIP),Wanfang,and the SinoMed Database.SRs on the use of CHM alone or in combination with Western medications for MPP in children were included.The study compared the effects of Western medicine alone with those of CHM.The evidence quality using the A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews(AMSTAR)2,the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses(PRISMA)2020,and the Grading of Recommendations,Assessment,Development,and Evaluation(GRADE)criteria.The primary indicators were the total effective rate,fever subsidence time,and cough disappearance time.The secondary outcomes were pulmonary rale disappearance time,average hospitalization time,lung X-ray infiltrate disappearance time,immunological indices,and inflammatory cytokine levels.Results:Twelve relevant SRs were included;75%(9/12)were assessed as very low quality,and 25%(3/12)Were rated as low quality using the AMSTAR 2 criteria.According to the PRISMA 2020 checklist,the average SR score was 20.3 out of a 27 point maximum.In all SRs,CHM demonstrated improvement in symptoms and signs among children with MPP.The evidence quality using the GRADE criteria ranged from"very low"(>50%)to"moderate"(<5%).The most common downgrading factor was imprecision,followed by publication bias and inconsistency.Conclusion:This overview highlights the limited quality of the methodology and evidence of the included SRs.Although the included studies showed the beneficial effects of CHM on MPP in children,it was difficult to draw firm conclusions owing to methodological flaws.