摘要
目的:应用网状Meta分析法比较不同针灸疗法治疗HFS的疗效。方法:通过计算机检索中国知网、万方、维普等8个数据库从建库至2022年12月针灸治疗HFS的RCT,运用Cochrane 5.1.0偏倚风险评估工具进行质量评价,应用R4.2.2加载“gemtc”“rjags”程序包进行网状Meta统计分析。结果:纳入文献35篇,涉及16种干预措施,结局指标总有效率的SUCRA值从高到低的前3种干预措施为“放血+灸法”“埋针”“灸法”;Penn痉挛频率分级SUCRA值从高到低的前3种干预措施为“毫针+埋针”“针刀”“埋针”。结论:针灸疗法治疗HFS患者有一定的疗效优势,但在不同结局指标下,最佳的治疗方式可能有所区别,需要更多大样本、多中心的RCT对结果加以验证。
Objective:To compare the effectiveness of different acupuncture treatments for Hemifacial Spasm(HFS) using network meta-analysis.Methods:We conducted a database search in eight databases,including CNKI,WanFang,VIP,and others,up to December 2022,to identify randomized controlled trials(RCTs) on acupuncture treatment for HFS.Quality assessment was performed using the Cochrane 5.1.0 risk of bias assessment tool.Network meta-analysis was conducted using R 4.2.2 with the “gemtc” and “rjags” packages.Results:35 articles were included,covering 16 different intervention methods.The top three interventions with the highest Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking(SUCRA) values for the overall effectiveness were “bleeding and moxibustion” “embedding needles” and “moxibustion.” For the Penn grading of spasm frequency,the top three interventions were “needling and embedding needles” “needle-knife” and “embedding needles” based on their SUCRA values.Conclusion:Acupuncture therapy shows certain advantages in treating HFS patients.However,the optimal treatment method may vary depending on different outcome measures.Further validation is required through large-sample,multicenter RCTs.
作者
王拓然
王莹莹
Wang Tuoran;Wang Yingying(Acupuncture and Moxibustion Research Institute,Chinese Academy of Traditional Chinese Medicine,Beijing 100700,China)
出处
《亚太传统医药》
2024年第6期154-159,共6页
Asia-Pacific Traditional Medicine
基金
杨金洪全国名老中医药专家传承工作室项目(ZZ2023009)。
