摘要
目的:评价中药配合三阶梯止痛与单纯三阶梯止痛比较治疗癌性疼痛的有效性和安全性。方法:采用Cochrane系统评价方法,计算机检索Cochrane图书馆临床对照试验资料库、MEDLINE、CBM、CNKI、VIP和万方;同时手检相关期刊和会议论文集,纳入有关中药配合三阶梯止痛治疗癌性疼痛的随机对照试验,并按Cochrane系统评价员手册4.2.2版推荐的质量评价标准评价纳入研究质量,对同质的研究进行Meta分析。结果:共检索到符合纳入标准的中文文献12篇(1366例患者)。文献质量评价结果显示,所有文献均为C级。Meta分析结果显示,中药配合三阶梯止痛治疗癌痛在近期镇痛效果、提高生活质量和减少不良反应发生方面优于单纯三阶梯止痛药治疗。结论:中药配合三阶梯止痛治疗癌性疼痛优于单纯三阶梯止痛治疗。但由于纳入试验研究的方法学质量普遍较低,期待更多设计合理、方法科学的大样本多中心随机双盲对照临床试验,提供高质量的证据。
Objective ： To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of Traditional Chinese Medicine （TCM） plus a 3-step analgesic ladder compared with a 3-step analgesic ladder alone, in the treatment of cancer pain. Methods ： The Cochrane library, MEDLINE, EMBASE,CACERLIT,CBM, CNKI, VIP and Wanfang searched electronically. Relevant journals and conference proceedings were also hand searched. The quality of included studies was assessed according to the criteria recommended by the Cochrane Handbook for systematic Reviews of interventions and meta-analyses were performed for homogeneous studies using The Cochrane collaboration＇s Reveman 4.2.10 software. Results; Twelve trials,all published in China,involving 1366 participants were included. The quality of all studies was graded C （low）. Meta-analyses showed that TCM plus a 3-step analgesic ladder compared to a 3-step analgesic ladder alone,could improve effectiveness,quality of life and reduce the side effects of conventional analgesic. Conclusion：The treatment regimen of TCM plus a 3 step an- algesic ladder is superior to a 3-step analgesic ladder alone in treating cancer pain. As the existing date have a high risk of bias, the current evidence is insufficient to define the efficacy of the combination treatment, and further large-scale, high quality randomized controlled trials are needed.
出处
《华西医学》
CAS
2009年第1期9-13,共5页
West China Medical Journal
关键词
癌痛
中医药
随机对照试验
系统评价
cancer pain
Traditional Chinese Medicine
randomized control trail
Meta-analysis
