中国骨质疏松杂志

电针对原发性骨质疏松患者有效性的Meta分析和系统评价

The efficacy of electro-acupuncture on primary osteoporosis：Meta-analysis and systematic evaluation

DOI：10.3969/j.issn.1006.7108.2017.02.010

英文关键词:Electro-acupuncture Primary osteoporosis Meta analysis Systematic analysis

基金项目:

作者	单位
伍亚男1,2 罗丁3 符文彬3*	1.长沙市第四医院中医科，湖南长沙410000 2.广州中医药大学第二临床医学院，广东广州510405 3.广东省中医院针灸科，广东广州510120

摘要点击次数: 964

全文下载次数: 667

中文摘要:

目的系统评价电针对原发性骨质疏松的有效性和安全性。方法计算机检索CNKI，WanFang, VIP, PubMed, EMbase和the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials等数据库，查找对照组为西药，治疗组以电针为主的治疗原发性骨质疏松的随机对照或半随机对照试验,检索时限截至2015年12月。采用RevMan 5. 3及Statal2. 0软件进行Meta分析。结果最终纳人11篇文献，包括972例患者，文献质量评价显示文献质量偏低。Meta分析结果显示：电针组与西药组相比，在改善疼痛积分、腰椎骨密度疗效可能相当，[SMD = -0. 90,95% CI( - 1. 87，0. 08)，P = 0. 07 ]、[ MD = 0. 03 ,95% CI( -0.01,0. 07,P= 0.12];其中电针综合组在改善疼痛积分方面疗效可能优于西药组[SMD= -1.86，95% CI( -3.16，-0. 56) ,P=0.005]。电针组在改善症状积分、有效率方面疗效可能优于西药组[SMD = - 1.47,95% CI( - 2. 55，-0. 39, P = 0. 008 ]、[ RR = 1.24， 95%CI(1. 15,1.35)，P<0.00001 ]。以疼痛积分、有效率为效应量的发表偏倚Egger检验P值分别为0. 464、0. 934。结论现有有限的证据表明，电针疗法治疗原发性骨质疏松的疗效可能与西药相当，并且可以与西药协同增效，但由于受到纳入文献质与量的限制，进一步研究仍是必要的，且要关注安全性研究。

英文摘要:

Objective To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of electro-acupuncture ( EA) on primary osteoporosis ( PO). Methods Clinical randomized controlled trials of EA for PO were searched from database of CNKI, VIP, WanFang, Cochrane library, PubMed, and Embase up to December 2015 and further retrieval was carried out concerning the reference of the related paper. Randomized，controlled or half randomized controlled trials of EA were compared with Western medicine treatment, Meta-analysis was performed using software RevMan5. 3 and Statal2.0. Results A total of i \ studies invoiving 972 cases were included in the study. Meta-analysis suggested that EA treatment for PO was as effective as Western medicine on relieving pain (MD = -0.90, 95% CI (- 1. 87, 0. 08), P = 0.01) and increasing bone mineral density MD = 0. 03，95% CI ( - 0. 01，0. 07)，P = 0. 12). The combined treatment was more effective in relieving pain (SMD = - 1. 86，95% CI ( -3. 16, -0. 56), P =0.005). Patient in the EA group had better symptom score and effective rate ( SMD = - 1.47, 95% CI ( -2.55, - 0. 39), P = 0. 008，RR = 1. 24，95% CI ( 1. 15, 1. 35),P=< 0. 00001). Egger test suggested that there was no publication bias (P=0. 464，P=0. 934). Conclusion EA treatment for PO shows that it is as effective as Western medicine. The combination of the two may be more effective. Because of the low quality and a small amount of the research, more high-qualified evidence and more attention are still needed.

查看全文查看/发表评论下载PDF阅读器

关闭