4.3 Review

The Traditional Chinese Medicine and Relevant Treatment for the Efficacy and Safety of Atopic Dermatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

出版社

HINDAWI LTD
DOI: 10.1155/2017/6026434

关键词

-

资金

  1. China National Natural Science Foundation [81403292]
  2. Natural Science Basic Study Project of Shaanxi Province [2015JQ8290]
  3. Boosting Project of Xijing Hospital [XJZT13M18]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Atopic dermatitis (AD) has become a common skin disease that requires systematic and comprehensive treatment to achieve adequate clinical control. Traditional Chinese medicines and related treatments have shown clinical effects for AD in many studies. But the systematic reviews and meta-analyses for them are lacking. Objective. The systematic review and meta-analysis based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement were conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of traditional Chinese medicines and related treatments for AD treatment. Methods. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were searched based on standardized searching rules in eight medical databases from the inception up to December 2016 and a total of 24 articles with 1,618 patients were enrolled in this meta-analysis. Results. The results revealed that traditional Chinese medicines and related treatments did not show statistical differences in clinical effectiveness, SCORAD amelioration, and SSRI amelioration for AD treatment compared with control group. However, EASI amelioration of traditional Chinese medicines and related treatments for AD was superior to control group. Conclusion. We need to make conclusion cautiously for the efficacy and safety of traditional Chinese medicine and related treatment on AD therapy. More standard, multicenter, double-blind randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of traditional Chinese medicine and related treatment for AD were required to be conducted for more clinical evidences providing in the future.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据