期刊文献+

中西医结合治疗广泛性焦虑的系统评价 被引量:5

Evaluation of the treatment of general anxiety of integrated traditional Chinese and Western Medicine
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的:系统评价中西医结合治疗广泛性焦虑的有效性和安全性。方法:全面搜集有关中西医结合与单纯西药比较治疗广泛性焦虑的随机对照试验,依据Cochrane协作网的系统评价原则对所纳入研究进行评价。结果:纳入875名患者与对照组比较,试验组的疗效显著提高[RR=4.43,95%CI(2.66,7.36)],HAMA评分显著减少[MD=2.10,95%CI(1.27,2.92)],不良反应少[RR=0.22,95%CI(0.12,0.38)]。结论:Meta分析提示中西医结合治疗方式疗效好、安全性高,但所纳入研究的质量普遍偏低,可能影响其可靠性。 Objective:To assess the clinical eficacy and safety of integrated traditional Chinese medicine and western medicine in the treatment of generalized anxiety. Methods: Collecting the RCTs about the comparsion between Integrated Chinese Medicine and CM and simple WM, evalblating according the cochrane. Results: Involving 875 patients. Meta- analysis results showed that the experimental group (Integrative Group) compared with the control group (western medicine alone group): the clinical efficacy of the test group was significantly improved [ RR = 4.43,95% CI (2.66,7.36)]; experimental group showed a significant reduction in HAMA score [ MD = 2. 10,95% CI( 1.27,2. 92) ] ; less occurrence of adverse reactions of the experimental group [ RR = 0. 22,95% CI(0. 12,0.38 )]. Conclusion: The meta-analysis suggested that compared with western medicine alone group, the integrative Medicine treatment showed higher efficacy, more significant reduction in HAMA score, and less adverse reactions, but the low ratings of the quality of the included studies and the small sample, may reduce the reliability.
出处 《中国中医基础医学杂志》 CAS CSCD 北大核心 2013年第8期881-884,共4页 JOURNAL OF BASIC CHINESE MEDICINE
关键词 广泛性焦虑 中西医结合 系统评价 META分析 generalized anxiety Integrated CM and WM systematic review meta-analysis
  • 相关文献

参考文献14

二级参考文献25

共引文献68

同被引文献78

引证文献5

二级引证文献32

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部