A Critical Overview of Systematic Reviews of Shenfu Injection for Heart Failure

被引:16
作者
Huang, Jinke [1 ]
Wang, Yanlu [2 ]
Huang, Suihe [3 ]
Qin, Xiaohui [4 ]
Yan, Fang [3 ]
Shen, Min [1 ]
Huang, Yong [5 ]
机构
[1] Guangzhou Univ Chinese Med, Clin Med Coll 2, Guangzhou 510120, Guangdong, Peoples R China
[2] Shandong Univ Tradit Chinese Med, Clin Med Coll 1, Jinan 255014, Shandong, Peoples R China
[3] Guangdong Prov Hosp Chinese Med, Res Base Clin Applicat Tradit Chinese Med Class, Guangzhou 510120, Guangdong, Peoples R China
[4] Guangdong Prov Hosp Chinese Med, Dept Neurol, Guangzhou 510120, Guangdong, Peoples R China
[5] Southern Med Univ, Sch Tradit Chinese Med, Guangzhou 510515, Guangdong, Peoples R China
关键词
D O I
10.1155/2021/8816590
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objectives. Shenfu Injection (SFI) was widely used in the treatment of heart failure (HF) in China. A plethora of systematic reviews/meta-analyses (SRs/MAs) has been conducted in this research area, although with scattered results. The purpose of this overview was to conduct a comprehensive review to summarize and critically evaluate the existing evidence. Methods. Digital databases were searched for SRs/MAs up to January 28, 2021. Two authors independently screened the reviews and assessed the methodological quality of included SRs/MAs using Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR-2). Quality of evidence for outcomes evaluated within the reviews was appraised with the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Results. Thirteen SRs/MAs met the inclusion criteria. Based on AMSTAR-2, the quality of all SRs/MAs was critically low, because all of them have more than one critical domains that were unmet. Based on GRADE, the evidence quality of 24 outcome measures was low or very low, 27 outcome measures was moderate, and none outcome measure was high. Descriptive analysis showed that SFI was an effective and safe method for HF. Conclusions. The use of SFI for the treatment of HF may be clinically effective and safe. However, this conclusion must be interpreted cautiously due to the generally low methodological quality and low evidence quality of the included SRs/MAs. More rigorously designed SRs/MAs and RCTs with high methodological quality are necessary for further proof.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 25 条
[1]  
Atkins D, 2004, BMJ-BRIT MED J, V328, P1490
[2]   GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence [J].
Balshem, Howard ;
Helfand, Mark ;
Schuenemann, Holger J. ;
Oxman, Andrew D. ;
Kunz, Regina ;
Brozek, Jan ;
Vist, Gunn E. ;
Falck-Ytter, Yngve ;
Meerpohl, Joerg ;
Norris, Susan ;
Guyatt, Gordon H. .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2011, 64 (04) :401-406
[3]  
Bin X.F., 2010, J GUIYANG COLL TRADI, V5, P79
[4]  
Du Hao Du Hao, 2014, China Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine and Pharmacy, V29, P3643
[5]  
Guo L., 2020, WORLD J TRAD CHINESE, V15, p2387 2396
[6]  
[侯雅竹 Hou Yazhu], 2011, [中国循证医学杂志, Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine], V11, P292
[7]  
[黄芳 HUANG Fang], 2011, [中国医院药学杂志, Chinese Journal of Hospital Pharmacy], V31, P1103
[8]  
Jia M.X., 2018, J EMERG TCM, V27, P797, DOI DOI 10.3969/J.ISSN.1004-745X.2018.05.012
[9]   Prevalence of Depression in Patients With Hypertension A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis [J].
Li, Zhanzhan ;
Li, Yanyan ;
Chen, Lizhang ;
Chen, Peng ;
Hu, Yingyun .
MEDICINE, 2015, 94 (31)
[10]  
Ma R., 2009, HERALD MED, V28, P1473