Changes in pharmacist's recommendations of over-the-counter treatments for the common cold during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The common cold is one of the most frequently occurring illnesses worldwide. The aim of this study was to determine which OTC anti-common cold medications were most often recommended by pharmacists and if the COVID-19 pandemic affected such recommendations. METHODS: Non-interventional, observational research trial using a self-developed questionnaire to collect data on pharmacists' recommendations for anti-common cold OTC treatment. The data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic (December 2021-February 2022) in four large community network pharmacies in Lodz (Poland) and then compared with an analogue period of time before the pandemic (December 2019-February 2020). RESULTS: During COVID-19 pandemic there was a significant (p < 0.05) reduction in paracetamol, acetylsalicylic acid, metamizole magnesium, inosines, alpha-mimetics, mucolytics, homeopathics, and sore throat products and an increase in other tablets/capsules and add-on product recommendations. There was a significant relationship (p < 0.05, OR > 1) between the recommended frequency of paracetamol, inosines, sore throat products (each symptom), metamizole magnesium (headache, fever), acetylsalicylic acid (headache, fever, fatigue), NSAIDs, alpha-mimetics (headache, rhinorrhea), pseudoephedrine (rhinorrhea), homeopathics (headache), herbal products (fatigue), antihistamines (rhinorrhea, cough), and mucolytics (headache, fever, cough). CONCLUSIONS: Favorable prices (before COVID-19 pandemic) and reports on common NSAIDs side effects (beginning of the pandemic) led to high sale of paracetamol. Increased awareness of clinical effectiveness of some medications or their reduced availability influenced their limited recommendations.

Exploration of the utility of different doses of Qingfei Dayuan granules: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Clinical studies have confirmed that Qingfei Dayuan (QFDY) granules are effective in the treatment of influenza and upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs) caused by pulmonary heat-toxin syndrome (PHTS). Granules of Chinese medicine formulations have become a widely used dosage form in clinical practice. With the continuous optimization of extraction technology, the advantages of Chinese medicine granules have been gradually demonstrated, but the price of Chinese medicine granules is generally higher than that of traditional dosage forms of Chinese medicine, and we support the rational use of the appropriate dosage of QFDY for patients with these conditions. Therefore, we set up half of the conventional dose as the low dose group, and designed the three-arm study to rigorously compare the efficacy difference of low-dose QFDY, QFDY and the placebo group, with the expectation of providing scientific support for the rational selection of the dose and the safe and effective use of the medicine in clinical practice. METHODS: We recruited 108 patients with clinical diagnoses of influenza and URTIs caused by PHTS to receive treatment at six hospitals in Hubei, China. Using a centralized randomization system, patients were randomly assigned at a 1:1:1 ratio to the QFDY, low-dose QFDY, or placebo control groups to receive the corresponding drug, and the study physicians, subjects, outcome assessors, and statisticians were unaware of group assignments. The primary outcome was the time to complete fever relief. Secondary outcomes included the efficacy of Chinese medicine in alleviating signs and symptoms and the disappearance rate of individual symptoms. Adverse events were monitored throughout the trial. RESULTS: A total of 108 patients were recruited. A total of 106 patients were included in the full analysis set (FAS). In the FAS analysis, there was no statistically significant difference in baseline of the three groups before treatment (P > 0.05). 1. Regarding the median time to complete fever relief, the QFDY, low-dose QFDY and placebo groups had median times of 26 h, 40 h and 48 h, respectively. The QFDY group had a shorter time to complete fever relief than the placebo group, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05), while the low-dose QFDY group had a shorter time than the placebo group, but the difference was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). 2. In terms of the total efficacy of Chinese medicine in alleviating symptoms at the end of three full days of treatment, as well as the cure rate of red and sore throat, stuffy and runny nose, and sneezing, QFDY and low-dose QFDY were superior to the placebo, and the differences were statistically significant (P < 0.01). There was no statistical significance in the comparison between the QFDY group and the low-dose QFDY group (P > 0.05). 3. In terms of the headache cure rate after three full days of treatment, QFDY was superior to the placebo, with a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05), and there was no significant efficacy of low-dose QFDY. 4. Safety comparisons showed no serious adverse events and 30 minor adverse events, which were not clinically considered to be related to the drug and were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: In the treatment of patients with influenza and URTIs caused by PHTS, which are mainly characterized by clinical symptoms such as red and sore throat, stuffy and runny nose, and sneezing, when fever is not obvious or low-grade fever is present, the use of low-dose QFDY to simply alleviate the clinical symptoms is recommended and preferred. Moreover, with its good safety profile, QFDY can be used in the treatment of patients with influenza and URTIs caused by PHTS, which can effectively shorten the duration of fever, significantly increase the total efficacy of Chinese medicine in alleviating symptoms after 3 days of treatment, and accelerate the recovery of symptoms such as red and sore throat, stuffy and runny nose, sneezing, and headache, etc. Clinical Trial Registration: http://www.chictr.org.cn. TRIAL NUMBER: ChiCTR2100043449. Registered on 18 February 2021.

[Systematic review and Meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of Bidouyan Oral Liquid in treatment of rhinosinusitis].

This study aimed to systematically review the efficacy and safety of Bidouyan Oral Liquid in the treatment of rhinosinu-sitis(RS). CNKI, Wanfang, SinoMed, VIP, Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMbase, Web of Science, and Ovid were searched for the randomized controlled trial(RCT) of Bidouyan Oral Liquid for the treatment of RS patients. Moreover, the reference lists and the grey literature were searched manually. Two researchers independently screened the literature and extracted data. The Cochrane collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias(RoB 2.0) in randomized trial was used to assess the methodological quality of the included stu-dies. Meta-analysis was performed in RevMan 5.3 and Stata 12.0, and the grades of recommendation, assessment, development and evaluation(GRADE) was employed to evaluate the quality of evidence. A total of 54 RCTs(35 with drug combinations and 19 with single drugs) comprising 7 511 patients(3 973 in the observation group and 3 538 in the control group) were included. Meta-analysis showed that Bidouyan Oral Liquid + conventional treatment was superior to conventional treatment alone in increasing the total response rate(RR=1.19, 95%CI[1.15, 1.24], P<0.000 01) and decreasing the Lund-Kennedy scores(MD=-1.94, 95%CI[-2.61,-1.26], P<0.000 01), Lund-Mackay scores(MD=-2.14, 95%CI[-2.98,-1.31], P<0.000 01), and visual analogue scale(VAS) scores(MD_(total VAS scores)=-1.28, 95%CI[-1.56,-1.01], P<0.000 01; MD_(nasal congestion VAS scores)=-0.58, 95%CI[-0.89,-0.27], P=0.000 2; MD_(runny nose VAS scores)=-0.61, 95%CI[-0.93,-0.29], P=0.000 2; MD_(olfactory dysfunction VAS scores)=-0.43, 95%CI[-0.52,-0.34], P<0.000 01; MD_(head and facial pain VAS scores)=-0.41, 95%CI[-0.57,-0.26], P<0.000 01). Furthermore, the combined treatment outperformed conventional treatment alone in improving the mucociliary transport rate(MTR)(MD=1.64, 95%CI[1.08, 2.20], P<0.000 01) and lowering the levels of inflammatory cytokines{tumor necrosis factor-α(TNF-α)(SMD=-1.95, 95%CI[-2.57,-1.33], P<0.000 01), interleukin-6(IL-6)(SMD=-2.64, 95%CI[-4.08,-1.21], P=0.000 3)} in RS patients. In addition, the combined treatment did not increase the incidence of adverse reactions(RR=0.83, 95%CI[0.44, 1.57], P=0.57). Bidouyan Oral Liquid was superior to conventional treatment in increasing total response rate(RR=1.25, 95%CI[1.18, 1.32], P<0.000 01), decreasing the Lund-Kennedy(P<0.01) and Lund-Mackay scores(P<0.05), alleviating major symptoms(P_(total VAS scores)<0.01; P_(nasal congestion VAS scores)<0.01; P_(runny nose VAS scores)<0.01; P_(olfactory dysfunction VAS scores)<0.05; P_(head and facial pain VAS scores)<0.01), and decreasing adverse reactions(P=0.03). The results showed that either Bidouyan Oral Liquid or Bidouyan Oral Liquid + conventional treatment can increase the total response rate, decrease the Lund-Kennedy and Lund-Mackay scores, and mitigate major symptoms. In addition, Bidouyan Oral Liquid + conventional treatment improved MTR and reduced the expression of TNF-α and IL-6 without causing serious adverse events. However, due to the limited methodological quality of the included studies, large-sample and high-quality RCTs are needed to provide evidence support.

[Systematic review and Meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of Shufeng Jiedu Capsules in treatment of influenza].

This study aims to systematically review the efficacy and safety of Shufeng Jiedu Capsules in the treatment of influenza. The randomized controlled trial(RCT) of Shufeng Jiedu Capsules alone or in combination with conventional western medicine for treating influenza were retrieved from PubMed, EMbase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, SinoMed, CNKI, VIP, Wanfang, and ClinicalTrails.gov. The data analysis was performed in RevMan 5.4.1. The Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool was used to evaluate the quality of the involved RCT, and GRADEpro GDT to assess the quality of the evidence. A total of 11 RCTs involving 1 836 patients were included in this study. Compared with conventional western medicine, Shufeng Jiedu Capsules/Shufeng Jiedu Capsules + conventional western medicine improved the response rate(RR=1.09, 95%CI[1.03, 1.15], P=0.002), shortened the time to relief of cough, and increased the 3-day sore throat relief rate, whereas there was no significant difference in the time to fever abatement, the time to relief of sore throat, 3-day cough relief rate, or 3-day runny nose relief rate. Subgroup-analysis showed that Shufeng Jiedu Capsules + conventional western medicine improved the response rate(RR=1.11, 95%CI[1.08, 1.15], P<0.000 01), shortened the time to relief of cough, and increased the 3-day relief rate of symptoms(cough, sore throat, and runny nose) compared with conventional western medicine alone, while there was no significant difference in the time to fever abatement or the time to relief of sore throat. Shufeng Jiedu Capsules alone could not improve the response rate(RR=0.97, 95%CI[0.93, 1.02], P=0.19). In addition, Shufeng Jiedu Capsules/Shufeng Jiedu Capsules + conventional western medicine vs conventional western medicine were no significant difference in adverse reactions(RR=0.98, 95%CI[0.57, 1.69], P=0.95). The available evidence suggests that Shufeng Jiedu Capsules is effective and safe in the treatment of influenza, and the combination of Shufeng Jiedu Capsules with conventional western medicine can accelerate the relief of symptoms. However, since the number and quality of the included studies were low, the above findings remained to be further verified by multicenter RCT with large sample sizes.

Treatment Effect of Phototherapy with Low-Level Energy in Patients with Allergic Rhinitis: A Single-Arm Observational Study.

Allergic rhinitis is one of the most common health challenges and has a chronic and repetitive course that requires symptomatic treatment. We aimed to investigate the effect of phototherapy on allergic rhinitis and how long it takes to demonstrate treatment effect. Twenty-one patients who were diagnosed with allergic rhinitis using the skin prick test were enrolled. Red light (660 nm) and infrared light (940 nm) with a low power energy of 5 mW were used three times a day at intervals of at least 5 h. The Rhinoconjuntivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ) and a visual analog scale (VAS) were used to measure the changes in symptoms. The median RQLQ and VAS scores before treatment were 62 (49-81.5) and 3 (2-5) points, respectively. The RQLQ score improved significantly at two and four weeks after treatment (52 [39-62.5]) and 46.0 [30.5-57.0], respectively). The VAS scores also improved significantly at two and four weeks after treatment. Nasal obstruction and rhinorrhea improved significantly at one week after the procedure. Low-power (5 mW) light irradiation (660 nm red light and 940 nm infrared) was effective in improving the symptoms of allergic rhinitis. In addition, symptom improvement became clear approximately a week after use. Further studies are required to reach a definitive conclusion.

[Systematic review and Meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of Biyuan Tongqiao Granules in treatment of chronic sinusitis].

The present study conducted a systematic review and Meta-analysis on the efficacy and safety of Biyuan Tongqiao Granules in the treatment of chronic sinusitis. CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, SinoMed, PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMbase, and Web of Science were searched for randomized controlled trials(RCTs) of Biyuan Tongqiao Granules in the treatment of chronic sinusitis. The quality of the included RCTs was assessed according to the Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool and the final included trials underwent Meta-analysis with RevMan 5.4.1. Fifty-four RCTs were included, with a total sample size of 7 278 cases. The results of Meta-analysis showed that the clinical efficacy of Biyuan Tongqiao Granules alone or in combination in the experimental group in the treatment of chronic sinusitis was superior to that in the control group with conventional western medicine, Chinese medicinal preparations, or surgery only(RR=1.19, 95%CI[1.15, 1.24], P<0.000 01). The combined use of Biyuan Tongqiao Granules on the basis of the control group was superior to the control group in improving the main symptoms and signs of chronic sinusitis [RR_(nasal congestion)=1.33, 95%CI[1.21, 1.45], P<0.000 01, RR_(runny nose)=1.28, 95%CI[1.18, 1.40], P<0.000 01, RR_(turbinate congestion or swelling)=1.28, 95%CI[1.16, 1.41], P<0.000 01]. Biyuan Tongqiao Granules alone or in combination could effectively reduce the Snot-20 score, which was superior to the control group(MD=-2.94, 95%CI[-3.60,-2.28], P<0.000 01). Biyuan Tongqiao Granules alone and in combination could effectively reduce the VAS score, which was superior to the control group(MD_(total score)=-4.44, 95%CI[-6.05,-2.82], P<0.000 01; MD_(nasal congestion VAS score)=-0.99, 95%CI[-1.38,-0.60], P<0.000 01; MD_(runny nose VAS score)=-1.19, 95%CI[-1.62,-0.76], P<0.000 01; MD_(dysosmia VAS score)=-0.96, 95%CI[-1.26,-0.65], P<0.000 01; MD_(head and face pain VAS score)=-0.73, 95%CI[-0.98,-0.47], P<0.000 01). The combined use of Biyuan Tongqiao Granules could effectively reduce the sinus CT score and the Lund-Mackey score of the endoscopic mucosal morphology(MD_(sinus CT score)=-3.68, 95%CI[-5.47,-1.88], P<0.000 1, MD_(endoscopic mucosal morphology score)=-3.06, 95%CI[-5.53,-0.59], P=0.02). Compared with the control group with conventional western medicine, Chinese medicinal preparations, or surgery only, combined use of Biyuan Tongqiao Granules did not increase the occurrence of adverse reactions(RR=0.68, 95%CI[0.26, 1.77], P=0.43). As demonstrated by the existing evidence, Biyuan Tongqiao Granules can improve the clinical efficacy of chronic sinusitis, relieve the clinical symptoms and signs, and reduce the Snot-20 score, VAS score, and Lund-Mackey score, without inducing serious adverse reactions, indicating that Biyuan Tongqiao Granules alone or in combination are more effective and safe in the treatment of chronic sinusitis than conventional western medicine, Chinese medicinal preparations, or surgical treatment. Since the quality of the included trials was generally low, large-scale, high-quality, rigorous, multi-center, and blinded-designed RCTs that meet international standards should be adopted in the future to increase the strength and level of evidence.

[Systematic review and Meta-analysis of Lianhua Qingwen preparations combined with Oseltamivir in treatment of influenza].

This study aims to explore the efficacy and safety of Lianhua Qingwen preparations combined with Oseltamivir in the treatment of influenza patients. PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMbase, SinoMed, CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP were searched for the randomized controlled trials(RCTs) involving the comparison between the influenza patients treated with Lianhua Qingwen preparations combined with Oseltamivir and those treated with Oseltamivir alone. Fever clearance time was taken as the primary outcome indicator. Clinical effective rate(markedly effective and effective), time to muscle pain relief, time to sore throat relief, time to cough relief, time to nasal congestion and runny nose relief, time to negative result of viral nucleic acid test, and adverse reactions were taken as the secondary outcome indicators. The data were extracted based on the outcome indicators and then combined. The Cochrane collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias was used to evaluate the quality of a single RCT, and the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluations(GRADE) system to assess the quality of a single outcome indicator. RevMan 5.3 was employed to analyze data and test heterogeneity. Finally, 16 RCTs involving 1 629 patients were included for analysis. The Meta-analysis showed that Lianhua Qingwen preparations combined with Oseltamivir was superior to Oseltamivir alone in the treatment of influenza in terms of clinical effective rate(RR=1.16, 95%CI [1.12, 1.20], P<0.000 01), fever clearance time(SMD=-2.02, 95%CI [-2.62,-1.41], P<0.000 01), time to muscle pain relief(SMD=-2.50, 95%CI [-3.84,-1.16], P=0.000 2), time to sore throat relief(SMD=-1.40, 95%CI [-1.93,-0.85], P<0.000 01), time to cough relief(SMD=-1.81, 95%CI [-2.44,-1.19], P<0.000 01), time to nasal congestion and runny nose(SMD=-2.31, 95%CI [-3.61,-1.01], P=0.000 5), and time to negative result of viral nucleic acid test(SMD=-0.68, 95%CI [-1.19,-0.16], P=0.01). However, due to the low quality of the trials, the above conclusions need to be proved by more high-quality clinical studies. In addition, we still need to attach importance to the adverse reactions of the integrated application of Chinese and western medicines.

Efficacy and safety of the Chinese herbal medicine Xiao-qing-long-tang for allergic rhinitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE: The classic Chinese herbal medicine formula Xiao-qing-long-tang (XQLT) is commonly recommended to manage allergic rhinitis (AR), but the treatment efficacy and safety of XQLT are uncertain. AIM OF THE STUDY: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of XQLT in treating AR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Nine databases were searched from their inception to April 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating XQLT for AR were included. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. A meta-analysis and a subgroup meta-analysis were conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of XQLT. RESULTS: Twenty-four RCTs were included in this meta-analysis. XQLT was compared to both placebo and Western medicine (WM), and XQLT combined with WM was compared with WM alone. Meta-analyses were conducted for total nasal symptom scores (TNSS), four individual nasal symptom scores, quality of life (QoL), effective rate, and recurrence rate. The TNSS decreased after XQLT treatment and combination treatment (mean difference (MD): -0.79; 95% confidence interval (CI) [-1.20, -0.38], standardized mean difference (SMD): -1.42; 95% CI [-1.59, -1.24], and SMD: -1.84; 95% CI [-2.08, -1.60]). The two individual nasal symptom scores decreased after XQLT treatment and combination treatment; these nasal symptoms comprised rhinorrhea (SMD: -0.30; 95% CI [-0.58, -0.02] and SMD: -0.48; 95% CI [-0.70, -0.26]), and nasal obstruction (SMD: -0.54; 95% CI [-0.78, -0.30] and SMD: -0.54; 95% CI [-0.76, -0.32). XQLT and XQLT combined with WM achieved a better effective rate than WM (risk ratio (RR): 1.18; 95% CI [1.11, 1.25] and RR: 1.16; 95% CI [1.10, 1.23]) and a lower recurrence rate than WM (RR: 0.24; 95% CI [0.13, 0.43] and RR: 0.47; 95% CI [0.31, 0.72]). XQLT was well tolerated in patients being treated for AR. CONCLUSION: Our results indicated that oral XQLT may alleviate the TNSS, rhinorrhea scores, and nasal obstruction scores of AR and is safe to use in clinical practice. However, more RCTs that follow rigorous methodologies and evaluate well-accepted outcome measures are required to evaluate the effectiveness of XQLT.