4.7 Review

Oral application of Chinese herbal medicine for allergic rhinitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Journal

PHYTOTHERAPY RESEARCH
Volume 35, Issue 6, Pages 3113-3129

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ptr.7037

Keywords

allergic diseases; complementary and alternative medicine; Hay fever; nasal symptoms; natural products; traditional Chinese medicine

Funding

  1. RMIT Emerging Researcher Grant [R24 AT001293]
  2. National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) [R24 AT001293]
  3. Cochrane ENT Disorders Group

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This systematic review found that oral Chinese herbal medicine may improve symptoms of allergic rhinitis and have advantages over Western medications in some aspects, but also has limitations. More large, multicenter, well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed in the future to validate the potential of Chinese herbal medicine for treating allergic rhinitis.
Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) has long been used for allergic rhinitis (AR). This systematic review aimed to investigate the clinical effects and safety of oral CHM for AR by comparing it to Western medications (WM). Nineteen databases were searched up to May 27, 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of CHM on the primary or secondary outcomes comparing to WM, in any age of the patients, were included. The pooled results were expressed as mean difference, standardized mean difference, or odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals. Eighteen RCTs were included and 17 of them were evaluated in the meta-analysis. CHM may improve total nasal symptom scores, individual symptom scores (rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, sneezing, and nasal itching), quality of life, and recurrence rate, compared to antihistamines (loratadine and chlorpheniramine). Only mild and transient adverse events of CHM were reported. However, there were no significant differences in some subgroup analyses in total nasal symptom scores, rhinorrhea, nasal obstruction, sneezing, nasal itching, and SF-36. Due to the small number of included studies, poor quality of trial design, and substantial heterogeneities, the potential of CHM for AR should be validated in large, multicenter, and well-designed RCTs in the future.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available