Traditional Chinese medicine for promoting mental health of patients with COVID-19: a scoping review.

This study aimed to systematically review and depict the current studies of traditional Chinese medicine for the mental health of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: A scoping review was conducted by searching PubMed, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang database, VIP database, and SinoMed, with the retrieval time being from the establishment of the database to April 18, 2022. The basic information of the included studies, objective, design, types of patients, interventions, outcomes, etc., was reviewed and summarized narratively. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias assessment tool, the methodological index for non-randomized studies or the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Results: We identified 30 traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) studies from six databases. Among them, finished randomized controlled trials (n = 16) accounted for most of the studies, followed by single-arm studies (n = 9). In terms of study theme, 20 studies defined the mental health of patients with COVID-19 as the research theme. Psychological assessment was included in the inclusion criteria (performed before participation) of nine studies, whereas the other studies only mentioned the mental outcomes. TCM interventions included TCM exercises (Yijinjing, Baduanjin, Liuzijue, Taichi), acupoint stimulation (auricular and body points), moxibustion, decoction, or granules based on TCM syndrome differentiation, decoction, or granules with fixed formulae (Baidu Jieduan granules, Xuanfei Baidu decoction, and Qingfei Paidu decoction), Chinese patent medicine (Jinhua Qinggan granules), TCM psychological therapy (TCM ideological therapy, TCM five-tone therapy, and TCM psychological sand table), and TCM nursing (dialectical care, dialectical diet, and psychological counseling). Anxiety and depression were the main outcomes evaluated in regard to mental health in patients with COVID-19. The limitations of methodological quality were predominantly from follow-up, blinding, and registration. Positive results were reported by 27 studies (90%, n = 30). Conclusion: We summarized the existing literature about the impact of TCM on mental health in patients with COVID-19. The number of studies evaluating the impact of TCM on mental health is encouraging, but overall methodological quality was low. Several TCM interventions warrant further evaluation, particularly among populations outside of China, for the purpose of establishing supporting evidence. More importantly, research with stronger methodological quality needs to be developed. Graphical abstract: http://links.lww.com/AHM/A36.

The efficacy of balneotherapy, mud therapy and spa therapy in patients with osteoarthritis: an overview of reviews.

Osteoarthritis is a degenerative disease considered a leading cause of functional disability. Its treatment is based on a combination of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions, but the role of these latter is still debated. This overview of systematic reviews aimed at evaluating the short-term efficacy of different thermal modalities in patients with osteoarthritis. We searched PubMed, Scopus, CINHAL, Web of Science, ProQuest and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from inception until October 2020, with no language restrictions. We selected the following outcomes a priori: pain, stiffness and quality of life. Seventeen systematic reviews containing 27 unique relevant studies were included. The quality of the reviews ranged from low to critically low. Substantial variations in terms of interventions studied, comparison groups, population, outcomes and follow-up between the included SRs were found. From a re-analysis of primary data, emerged that balneotherapy was effective in reducing pain and improving stiffness and quality of life, mud therapy significantly reduced pain and stiffness, and spa therapy showed pain relief. However, the evidence supporting the efficacy of different thermal modalities could be seriously flawed due to methodological quality and sample size, to the presence of important treatment variations, and to the high level of heterogeneity and the absence of a double-blind design. There is some encouraging evidence that deserves clinicians' consideration, suggesting that thermal modalities are effective on a short-term basis for treating patients with AO.

Clinical practice guideline for the integrated management of major trauma by the Italian National Institute of Health: process and methods.

BACKGROUND: Major trauma describes serious injuries requiring lifesaving interventions or resulting in long-term disability; it represents about 8% of all deaths worldwide. Specific guidelines can help reduce deaths and disabilities, provided they adhere to high quality and trustworthiness standards. This article aims at introducing the development process of the Istituto Superiore di Sanità, ISS (Italian National Institute of Health) guideline for major trauma integrated management. METHODS: We applied the ISS methodological standards including the GRADE-ADOLOPMENT approach for adoption, adaptation, and de novo development of trustworthy guidelines. RESULTS: The scope was formulated by the multidisciplinary panel with stakeholders' involvement; two guidelines were identified as appropriate sources for adolopment. Forty questions from the two source guidelines were prioritised and five new ones formulated. New systematic reviews or updates were conducted for each clinical question, Evidence to Decision frameworks developed or re-assessed and the recommendations formulated after public consultations and external review. The policy on conflicts of interest was applied throughout the process. CONCLUSIONS: Through a broad expertise representation, the early and wide stakeholders' participation, a continual process for disclosure and management of conflict of interests and the transparency of the process, ISS standards are proving to be an efficient model for developing trustworthy clinical guidance.

The quality of Cochrane systematic reviews of acupuncture: an overview.

BACKGROUND: Many systematic reviews of clinical trials on acupuncture were performed within the Cochrane Collaboration, the evidence-based medicine (EBM) most recognized organization. Objective of the article was to systematically collect and identify systematic reviews of acupuncture published in the Cochrane Library and assess their quality from a methodological perspective. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews to identify the reviews of acupuncture conducted until June 2019. The methodological quality of the included reviews was assessed using the AMSTAR 2 checklist, an evaluation tool for systematic reviews. RESULTS: Out of a total of 126 eligible reviews, 50 systematic reviews were included. According to the AMSTAR 2, 52% of Cochrane Systematic Reviews (CSRs) were of low quality, due to the presence of one or more weaknesses in at least one of the domains defined as critical for the methodological quality assessment. The less satisfied critical domain was inadequate investigation and discussion of publication bias. Declaration of potential sources of conflict of interest, and funding of the authors of the review and of the included studies were other important weaknesses. CONCLUSIONS: The main methodological flaws in the included CSRs were related to topics of relatively new concern in the conduction of systematic reviews of the literature. However, both, lack of attention about retrieval of negative studies, and statements about conflict of interests are crucial point for the evaluation of therapeutic interventions according to EBM methodology.

Core Outcome Set for Clinical Trials on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COS-COVID).

Since its outbreak in December 2019, a series of clinical trials on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been registered or carried out. However, the significant heterogeneity and less critical outcomes of such trials may be leading to a waste of research resources. This study aimed to develop a core outcome set (COS) for clinical trials on COVID-19 in order to tackle the outcome issues. The study was conducted according to the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) Handbook: Version 1.0, a guideline for COS development. A research group was set up that included experts in respiratory and critical medicine, traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), evidence-based medicine, clinical pharmacology, and statistics, in addition to medical journal editors. Clinical trial registry websites (www.chictr.org.cn and clinicaltrials.gov) were searched to retrieve clinical trial protocols and outcomes in order to form an outcome pool. A total of 78 clinical trial protocols on COVID-19 were included and 259 outcomes were collected. After standardization, 132 outcomes were identified within seven different categories, of which 58 were selected to develop a preliminary outcome list for further consensus. After two rounds of Delphi survey and one consensus meeting, the most important outcomes for the different clinical classifications of COVID-19 were identified and determined to constitute the COS for clinical trials on COVID-19 (COS-COVID). The COS-COVID includes one outcome for the mild type (time to 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) negativity), four outcomes for the ordinary type (length of hospital stay, composite events, score of clinical symptoms, and time to 2019-nCoV RT-PCR negativity), five outcomes for the severe type (composite events, length of hospital stay, arterial oxygen partial pressure (PaO2)/fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2), duration of mechanical ventilation, and time to 2019-nCoV RT-PCR negativity), one outcome for critical type (all-cause mortality), and one outcome for rehabilitation period (pulmonary function). The COS-COVID is currently the most valuable and practical clinical outcome set for the evaluation of intervention effect, and is useful for evidence assessment and decision-making. With a deepening understanding of COVID-19 and application feedback, the COS-COVID should be continuously updated.

Huangqi injection (a traditional Chinese patent medicine) for chronic heart failure: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Chronic heart failure (CHF) is a global public health problem. Therefore, novel and effective drugs that show few side-effects are needed. Early literature studies indicated that Huangqi injection is one of the most commonly used traditional Chinese patent medicines for CHF in China. As a large number of clinical studies has been carried out and published, it is essential to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of Huangqi injection. Therefore, we carried out this systematic review under the support of the framework of the Joint Sino-Italian Laboratory (JoSIL). OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Huangqi injection for CHF according to the available scientific knowledge. METHODS: An extensive search including PubMed, EMBASE, CBM, the Cochrane Library and Chinese literature databases was performed up to July 2008. Clinical trials regarding Huangqi injection for the treatment of CHF were searched for, irrespective of languages. The quality of each trial was assessed according to the Cochrane Reviewers' Handbook 5.0, and RevMan 5.0 provided by the Cochrane Collaboration and STATA 9.2 were used for data analysis. RESULTS: After selection of 1,205 articles, 62 RCTs and quasi-RCTs conducted in China and published in Chinese journals were included in the review. The methodological quality of the trials was low. In most trials inclusion and exclusion criteria were not specified. Furthermore, only one study evaluated the outcomes for drug efficacy after an adequate period of time. For these reasons and because of the different baseline characteristics we did not conduct a meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Although available studies are not adequate to draw a conclusion on the efficacy and safety of Huangqi injection (a traditional Chinese patent medicine), we hope that our work could provide useful experience on further studies on Huangqi injections. The overall level of TCM clinical research needs to be improved so that the efficacy of TCM can be evaluated by the international community and possibly some TCM can enter into the international market.

Clinical practice of traditional Chinese medicines for chronic heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Chinese medicines have been used for chronic heart failure (CHF) for thousands of years; however, the status of traditional Chinese medicines (TCMs) used for CHF has not been reported. This review was carried out in the framework of a joint Sino-Italian Laboratory. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the baseline of clinical practice of TCMs for CHF, and to provide valuable information for research and clinical practice. METHODS: The authors included articles about the use of TCMs for the treatment of CHF by searching the Chinese Journal Full-text Database (1994 to November 2007). RESULTS: In all, 1029 papers were included, with 239 herbs retrieved from these. The most commonly used herbs included Huangqi (Radix Astragali), Fuling (Poria), Danshen (Radix Salviae Miltiorrhiae), Fuzi (Radix Aconiti Lateralis Preparata) and Tinglizi (Semen Lepidii). Modern Chinese patent medicines (produced by pharmaceutical companies) and traditional prescriptions (comprising several herbs) are the application forms of these drugs. Shenmai, Shengmai and Astragalus injections were the most commonly used Chinese patent medicines. Some classic prescriptions (including Zhenwu decoction, Shengmai powder and Lingguizhugan decoction) were also frequently used. The effectiveness and safety of the TCMs were both satisfactory, and the traditional Chinese medicine and western medicine therapy could significantly improve the clinical effectiveness and reduce some of the adverse reactions from western medicines used alone. CONCLUSION: The authors have acquired overall information about the clinical application of TCMs for CHF. Modern pharmacology has provided limited evidence for the rationality of this clinical use. Further research is needed to provide more evidence.

Complex traditional Chinese medicine for poststroke motor dysfunction: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: For its current dimensions, stroke represents the world's primary health challenge. In China stroke is the second most common cause of death. Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) has for many centuries been used, and it is still widely used today in countries of south and east Asia for the treatment of people with stroke. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate whether complex Traditional Chinese Medicine (cTCM) improves poststroke motor recovery. In particular, we defined cTCM as intervention that included at least acupuncture and Chinese herbal medicine. METHODS: An extensive search including PubMed, EMBASE, CBM, and the Cochrane Library was performed up to December 2007. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) about cTCM for motor dysfunction of poststroke were searched irrespective of any language. The quality of each trial was assessed according to the Cochrane Reviewers' Handbook 4.2.6. RESULTS: After selection of 11 234 articles, 34 RCTs and quasi-RCTs were included. All these trials were conducted in China and published on Chinese journals. All trials but one reported results in favor of cTCM treatments suggesting a strong publication bias. Because of the significant clinical and methodological heterogeneity, no meta-analysis was performed and thus no cumulative result was obtained pooling data of RCTs. CONCLUSIONS: What appears from this systematic review is that scant data are available to evaluate efficacy of cTCM for poststroke motor dysfunction. Most of the primary studies available for this review were inadequately designed trials characterized by unknown dropout rates and definitional vagueness in outcomes measures. None of the studies approached important end points like death, survival times, rate of dependency, reduction in length of stay in hospital, etc. The key to lead to evidence-based practices is establishing a consensus on standardized relevant outcome measures and then designing and conducting appropriate RCTs that adopt those standards.