RESUMEN
Background: Depression is a common public health problem, characterized by persistent low mood, lack of pleasure and exhaustion. Conventional treatments such as antidepressants and psychotherapy have some limitations, including variable efficacy, adverse side effects and high costs. Acupoint catgut embedding (ACE) therapy, as a subtype of acupuncture, has gained increasing clinical application due to its long-term effects, higher patient compliance, and cost-effectiveness. This study aims to conduct a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ACE for depression. Methods: Electronic searches will be conducted in 12 databases (both in English and Chinese databases), encompassing from inception to April 2022, without language restrictions. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that involve ACE for treating depression will be included. The primary outcome measures will include the response rate, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), and Traditional Chinese Medicine Symptom Scale (TCMSSS). The secondary outcome measure will include Quality of Life scale score (QoL) and the incidence of adverse events. Results will be presented as risk ratios for dichotomous data and mean differences for continuous data. Two reviewers will independently conduct study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment. The methodological quality of eligible studies will be evaluated according to the criteria specified by the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (Version 5.1.0). Meta-analysis will be performed by RevMan 5.3 software. Discussion: Due to the limitations, a safer, high-efficacy and non-pharmacological intervention with minimal side effects is required for treating depression. ACE has the advantages of longer-lasting effects, improved patient compliance, and reduced treatment costs. This protocol represents a meta-analysis and systematic review, aiming to present the current evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of ACE for depression. It seeks to provide clinicians with a theoretical basis and valuable references for complementary and alternative medicine therapies in their treatment approaches. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails, Identifier CRD42022325966.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: In recent years, virtual reality (VR) has been tested as a therapeutic tool in neurorehabilitation research. However, the impact effectiveness of VR technology on for Parkinson's Disease (PD) patients is still remains controversial unclear. In order to provide a more scientific basis for rehabilitation of PD patients' modality, we conducted a systematic review of VR rehabilitation training for PD patients and focused on the improvement of gait and balance. METHODS: An comprehensive search was conducted using the following databases: PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINHAL, Embase and CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure).Articles published before 30 December 2018 and of a randomized controlled trial design to study the effects of VR for patients with PD were included. The study data were pooled and a meta-analysis was completed. This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guideline statement and was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42018110264). RESULTS: A total of sixteen articles involving 555 participants with PD were included in our analysis. VR rehabilitation training performed better than conventional or traditional rehabilitation training in three aspects: step and stride length (SMD = 0.72, 95%CI = 0.40,1.04, Z = 4.38, P<0.01), balance function (SMD = 0.22, 95%CI = 0.01,0.42, Z = 2.09, P = 0.037), and mobility(MD = -1.95, 95%CI = -2.81,-1.08, Z = 4.41, P<0.01). There was no effect on the dynamic gait index (SMD = -0.15, 95%CI = -0.50,0.19, Z = 0.86, P = 0.387), and gait speed (SMD = 0.19, 95%CI = -0.03,0.40, Z = 1.71, P = 0.088).As for the secondary outcomes, compared with the control group, VR rehabilitation training demonstrated more significant effects on the improvement of quality of life (SMD = -0.47, 95%CI = -0.73,-0.22, Z = 3.64, P<0.01), level of confidence (SMD = -0.73, 95%CI = -1.43,-0.03, Z = 2.05, P = 0.040), and neuropsychiatric symptoms (SMD = -0.96, 95%CI = -1.27,-0.65, Z = 6.07, P<0.01), while it may have similar effects on global motor function (SMD = -0.50, 95%CI = -1.48,0.48, Z = 0.99, P = 0.32), activities of daily living (SMD = 0.25, 95%CI = -0.14,0.64, Z = 1.24, P = 0.216), and cognitive function (SMD = 0.21, 95%CI = -0.28,0.69, Z = 0.84, P = 0.399).During the included interventions, four patients developed mild dizziness and one patient developed severe dizziness and vomiting. CONCLUSIONS: According to the results of this study, we found that VR rehabilitation training can not only achieve the same effect as conventional rehabilitation training. Moreover, it has better performance on gait and balance in patients with PD. Taken together, when the effect of traditional rehabilitation training on gait and balance of PD patients is not good enough, we believe that VR rehabilitation training can at least be used as an alternative therapy. More rigorous design of large-sample, multicenter randomized controlled trials are needed to provide a stronger evidence-based basis for verifying its potential advantages.