[Meta analysis on the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 by traditional Chinese and Western medicine].

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of combination of traditional Chinese and Western medicine in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) by Meta analysis. METHODS: The clinical randomized controlled trials (RCT) and cohort studies on the treatment of COVID-19 with combination of Chinese traditional and Western medicine published on CNKI, Wanfang database, VIP database and PubMed were searched by computer from January 2020 to June 2020. Patients in the simple Western medicine treatment group were treated with routine treatment of Western medicine, and the patients in integrated traditional Chinese and Western medicine treatment group were treated with traditional Chinese medicine on the basis of routine treatment of Western medicine. The main outcome was the total effective rate of treatment. The secondary outcome were the antipyretic rate, chest CT recovery rate, lymphocyte count (LYM), C-reactive protein (CRP) level and safety. The Cochrane manual and the Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) were used to evaluate the quality of the literature; the RevMan5.3 software was used to analyze the articles that meets the quality standards, and a funnel chart was drawn to evaluate the total effective publication bias. RESULTS: Thirteen articles were analyzed, including 1 039 COVID-19 patients, 559 in integrated traditional Chinese and Western medicine treatment group and 480 in simple Western medicine treatment group. The results of Meta- analysis showed that compared with the simple Western medicine treatment group, the combination of routine treatment of Western medicine and traditional Chinese medicine Qingfei Paidu decoction, Lianhua Qingwen granule, Shufeng jiedu capsule, Xuebijing injection or Reyanning mixture could significantly improve the total effective rate, antipyretic rate and chest CT recovery rate [total effective rate: odds ratio (OR) = 2.95, 95% confidence interval (95%CI) was 2.10-4.14, P < 0.000 01; antipyretic rate: OR =3.01, 95%CI was 1.64-5.53, P = 0.000 4; chest CT recovery rate: OR = 2.53, 95%CI was 1.83-3.51, P = 0.000 1], increase LYM levels [mean difference (MD) = 0.26, 95%CI was 0.02-0.50, P = 0.03], and reduce of CRP content (MD = -17.68, 95%CI was -33.14 to -2.22, P = 0.02). Based on the funnel chart analysis of 12 articles with total efficiency, the result showed that the funnel chart distribution was not completely symmetrical, indicating that there might be publication bias. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of routine treatment with Western medicine, combined with traditional Chinese medicine can significantly improve the total effective rate of COVID-19 and improve the laboratory results and clinical symptoms of patients. Compared with the routine treatment of Western medicine alone, the combination of traditional Chinese and Western medicine has better clinical efficacy and safety.

Prevalence and Cost of Care Cascades After Low-Value Preoperative Electrocardiogram for Cataract Surgery in Fee-for-Service Medicare Beneficiaries.

IMPORTANCE: Low-value care is prevalent in the United States, yet little is known about the downstream health care use triggered by low-value services. Measurement of such care cascades is essential to understanding the full consequences of low-value care. OBJECTIVE: To describe cascades (tests, treatments, visits, hospitalizations, and new diagnoses) after a common low-value service, preoperative electrocardiogram (EKG) for patients undergoing cataract surgery. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Observational cohort study using fee-for-service Medicare claims data from beneficiaries aged 66 years or older without known heart disease who were continuously enrolled between April 1, 2013, and September 30, 2015, and underwent cataract surgery between July 1, 2014 and June 30, 2015. Data were analyzed from March 12, 2018, to April 9, 2019. EXPOSURES: Receipt of a preoperative EKG. The comparison group included patients who underwent cataract surgery but did not receive a preoperative EKG. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Cascade event rates and associated spending in the 90 days after preoperative EKG, or in a matched timeframe for the comparison group. Secondary outcomes were patient, physician, and area-level characteristics associated with experiencing a potential cascade. RESULTS: Among 110 183 cataract surgery recipients, 12 408 (11.3%) received a preoperative EKG (65.6% of them were female); of those, 1978 (15.9%) had at least 1 potential cascade event. The comparison group included 97 775 participants (63.1% female). Those who received a preoperative EKG experienced between 5.11 (95% CI, 3.96-6.25) and 10.92 (95% CI, 9.76-12.08) additional events per 100 beneficiaries relative to the comparison group. This included between 2.18 (95% CI, 1.34-3.02) and 7.98 (95% CI, 7.12-8.84) tests, 0.33 (95% CI, 0.19-0.46) treatments, 1.40 (95% CI, 1.18-1.62) new patient cardiology visits, and 1.21 (95% CI, 0.62-1.79) new cardiac diagnoses. Spending for the additional services was up to $565 per Medicare beneficiary (95% CI, $342-$775), or an estimated $35 025 923 annually across all Medicare beneficiaries in addition to the $3 275 712 paid for the preoperative EKGs. Among preoperative EKG recipients, those who were older (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] for patients aged 75 to 84 years vs 66 to 74 years old, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.28-1.57), had more chronic conditions (aOR for each additional Elixhauser condition, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.14-1.22), lived in more cardiologist-dense areas (aOR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.02-1.09), or had their preoperative EKG performed by a cardiac specialist rather than a primary care physician (aOR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.10-1.43) were more likely to experience a potential cascade. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Care cascades after preoperative EKG for cataract surgery are infrequent but costly. Policy and practice interventions to reduce low-value services and the cascades that follow could yield substantial savings.