Chuanxiong chadiao powder, a famous Chinese herbal prescription, for headache: A systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:16
作者
Li, Ji-huang
Cao, Xiao-pan
Wei, Jing-jing
Song, Liang
Liao, Feng-jiao
Zheng, Guo-qing [1 ]
Lin, Yan
机构
[1] Wenzhou Med Univ, Affiliated Hosp 2, Dept Neurol, Wenzhou 325027, Peoples R China
关键词
Headache; Rhizoma ligustici chuanxiong; Chinese herbal medicine; Systematic review; Meta-analysis; MIGRAINE; MANAGEMENT; MEDICINE; POPULATION; EFFICACY; TRIPTANS; QUALITY;
D O I
10.1016/j.ctim.2015.06.012
中图分类号
R [医药、卫生];
学科分类号
10 ;
摘要
Background: Headache have been recognized as major causes of public ill-health, whereas there currently are the limitations of conventional therapies available. Chuanxiong Chadiao Powder (CXCP) is a wellknown classic TCM herbal prescription with respect to treating headache for more than -1000 years. The objective of this study is to systematically assess the clinical efficacy and safety of CXCP for headache. Methods: A systematic literature search in four databases, up to May of 2014, was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which compared CXCP monotherapy or adjunct therapy with western conventional medicine (WCM) or placebo for headache. The primary outcome measures were headache frequency, headache duration, pain intensity scales, globe assessment, patients self report outcomes, and quality of life. The second outcome measures were the total clinical effective rate and adverse events. The methodological quality of Ras was assessed independently based on the 7 criteria recommended by the Cochrane Back Review Group. Results: A total of 3680 participants were included in 37 eligible studies. The methodological quality was generally poor and there was only one high quality trial. Meta-analyses of the studies found that significant effects of CXCP for improving headache frequency and headache duration and the total clinical effective rate compared with WCM or placebo control in treating headache (P < 0.01). Adverse event monitoring was reported in 22 studies (59%), while the other 15 studies (41%) did not mentioned. Conclusions: The evidence from present study is supported but limited for CXCP clinical use in the management of headache because of methodological flaws. Larger sample-sizes and rigorously designed Ras are required in the future. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:577 / 590
页数:14
相关论文
共 72 条
  • [1] Headache yesterday in Europe
    Andree, Colette
    Steiner, Timothy J.
    Barre, Jessica
    Katsarava, Zaza
    Miguel Lainez, Jose
    Lampl, Christian
    Lanteri-Minet, Michel
    Rastenyte, Daiva
    Ruiz de la Torre, Elena
    Tassorelli, Cristina
    Stovner, Lars Jacob
    [J]. JOURNAL OF HEADACHE AND PAIN, 2014, 15 : 1 - 8
  • [2] [Anonymous], SHANXI J TRADIT CHIN
  • [3] [Anonymous], CHIN MOD DOCTOR
  • [4] [Anonymous], J HEBEI TRADIT CHIN
  • [5] [Anonymous], GUID PRINC CLIN RES
  • [6] [Anonymous], EVIDENCE BASED COMPL
  • [7] [Anonymous], CHIN J INTEGR MED
  • [8] [Anonymous], J APOPLEXY NERV DIS
  • [9] [Anonymous], ZHEJIANG J INTEGR TR
  • [10] [Anonymous], SHANDONG J TRADIT CH