中医药治疗过敏性咳嗽的系统评价和Meta分析

Systematic Evaluation and Meta-analysis of Traditional Chinese Medicine in the Treatment of Allergic Cough

目的运用Meta分析评价中医药治疗过敏性咳嗽的有效性和安全性,为临床治疗及相关研究提供参考。方法通过计算机检索有关文献数据库中关于单纯中医药治疗为治疗组、常规西药治疗为对照组治疗过敏性咳嗽的随机对照临床试验(RCTs),采用RevMan 5.3软件进行Meta分析。结果本文最终纳入14篇文献,共计1223例患者,其中,单纯中医药治疗组610例,单纯西药治疗对照组613例。Meta分析结果显示:治疗组患者总有效率明显高于对照组[RR=1.22,95%CI(1.16,1.29),P<0.00001],按年龄段进行亚组分析的总有效率亦是治疗组患者总有效率优于对照组,治疗后咳嗽症状积分低于对照组[总效应Z=2.01,P<0.00001,MD=-2.23,95%CI(-4.41,-0.06)],治疗后血嗜酸粒细胞计数少于对照组[总效应Z=1.66,P<0.00001,SMD=-3.37,95%CI(-7.34,0.61)]。结论中医药治疗过敏性咳嗽的临床疗效优于常规西药治疗,且安全性高。但因受限于纳入文献质量不高和数量偏低,使本研究存在一定局限性,故仍需开展更高质量RCT来进一步证实。

Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Traditional Chinese Medicine in the treatment of allergic cough(AC),and to provide reference for clinical treatment and related research.Methods Randomized controlled clinical trials of treating allergic cough with traditional Chinese medicine alone as treatment group and conventional western medicine as control group were retrieved from relevant literature databases by computer.Meta-analysis using RevMan 5.3 software.Results A total of 14 studies were included,with a total of 1,223 patients,610 cases in the treatment group and 613 cases in the control group.Meta-analysis results showed that,the total effective rate of the treatment group was significantly higher than that of the control group[RR=1.22,95%CI(1.16,1.29),P<0.00001],the total effective rate of subgroup analysis by age is also that of the treatment group is better than that of the control group,the cough symptom score after treatment was lower than that of the control group[Z=2.01,P<0.00001,MD=-2.23,95%CI(-4.41,-0.06)],the eosinophils count after treatment was less than that in the control group[Z=1.66,P<0.00001,SMD=-3.37,95%CI(-7.34,0.61)].Conclusion The clinical efficacy of traditional Chinese medicine in the treatment of allergic cough is better than that of conventional western medicine,and the safety is high.However,due to the low quality and quantity of the included literature,this study has some limitations.Therefore,a higher quality RCT is still needed for further confirmation.