督灸改善强直性脊柱炎病人脊柱活动度的Meta分析

Meta-analysis of Du moxibustion for improving spinal mobility in patients with ankylosing spondylitis

目的:系统评价督灸对强直性脊柱炎脊柱功能障碍病人脊柱活动度的干预效果。方法:计算机检索中国知网(CNKI)、万方、维普、中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM)、PubMed、Cochrane Library、Ovid、Embase、Web of Science、CINAHL(EBSCO Host)等数据库中关于督灸改善强直性脊柱炎脊柱功能障碍病人脊柱活动度的随机对照试验,检索时间从建库至2022年4月。严格按照纳入与排除标准对文献进行筛选、提取资料、文献质量评价,利用RevMan 5.3软件进行Meta分析。结果:共纳入9项研究,涉及698例病人。Meta分析结果显示,督灸可以改善强直性脊柱炎病人的脊柱活动度,干预组病人指地距[SMD=0.63,95%CI(0.30,0.97),P=0.0002]、枕墙距[MD=-0.96,95%CI(-1.73,-0.19),P=0.01]、胸廓活动度[MD=0.41,95%CI(0.30,0.53),P<0.00001]、腰椎活动度[MD=1.56,95%CI(1.22,1.90),P<0.00001]均优于对照组。结论:现有证据表明,督灸能够改善强直性脊柱炎脊柱功能障碍病人的脊柱活动度,但因本次Meta分析纳入的文献数量和质量的限制,上述结论尚需未来开展更多更高质量的双盲随机对照试验来验证。

Objective:To systematically evaluate the intervention effect of Du moxibustion on spinal mobility in patients with ankylosing spondylitis and spinal dysfunction.Methods:To search the randomized controlled trials of Du moxibustion improving spinal mobility in patients with ankylosing spondylitis and spinal dysfunction in CNKI,Wanfang,VIP,CBM,PubMed,Cochrane Library,Ovid,Embase,Web of Science,CINAHL(EBSCO Host)and other databases by computer.The retrieval time was from the establishment of the database to April 2022.Literature screening,data extraction and literature quality evaluation were conducted in strict accordance with inclusion and exclusion criteria.Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software.Results:A total of 9 studies were included,involving 698 patients.Meta-analysis showed that Du moxibustion could improve spinal mobility in patients with ankylosing spondylitis,finger-ground distance[SMD=0.63,95%CI(0.30,0.97),P=0.0002],occipital wall distance[MD=-0.96,95%CI(-1.73,-0.19),P=0.01],thoracic mobility[MD=0.41,95%CI(0.30,0.53),P<0.00001],lumbar mobility[MD=1.56,95%CI(1.22,1.90),P<0.00001]in the intervention group were better than those in the control group.Conclusions:Existing evidence suggests that Du moxibustion can improve spinal mobility in patients with ankylosing spondylitis and spinal dysfunction.However,due to the limitation of the number and quality of the literature included in this Meta-analysis,the above conclusions still need to be verified by more and higher-quality randomized controlled double-blind trials in the future.