플러스100%마이너스

통합검색
닫기

KMCRIC 챗봇에게

질문하기!

한의약융합데이터센터


근거중심한의약 DB

Home > 한의약융합데이터센터 > 근거중심한의약 DB
Title

Efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal medicine for depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors

Wang Y, Shi YH, Xu Z, Fu H, Zeng H, Zheng GQ.

Journal

J Psychiatr Res.

Year

2019

Vol (Issue)

117

Page

74-91.

doi

10.1016/j.jpsychires.2019.07.003.

PMID

31326751

Url

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31326751

MeSH

Keywords

Chinese herbal medicine; Depression; Meta-analysis; Systematic review; Traditional Chinese medicine

한글 키워드

KMCRIC
Summary & Commentary

KMCRIC 비평 보기 +

Korean Study

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:
To conduct a systematic review to assess the current evidence available for the effectiveness and safety of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) for depression.

METHODS:
An electronic search was conducted in eight databases from inception until April 2018. Randomized controlled trials with risk of bias (RoB) score ≥ 4 according to the Cochrane RoB tool were included for analyses. The primary outcome was the severity of depression. The secondary outcomes were total effective rate (TER) and adverse events. The minimally important difference (MID) of the severity of depression was a reduction in the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression 17 items (HAMD-17) scores by 4. RevMan 5.3 Software was used for data analyses. GRADE system was used to assess the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS:
A total of 40 eligible studies with 3549 subjects were identified. Meta-analyses showed that CHM monotherapy had better clinically effects than placebo according to HAMD-17 score (Mean Difference (MD) = -4.53, 95% CI (-5.69, -3.37), P < 0.00001; Certainty of evidence: Moderate) and TER (Risk Ratio (RR) = 2.15, 95% CI (1.61, 2.88), P < 0.00001, Certainty of evidence: Low). Meta-analyses showed that CHM was as effective as western conventional medications (WCM) in TER (RR = 0.99, 95% CI (0.95, 1.02), P = 0.41, Certainty of evidence: High) and in reducing HAMD-17 score (MD = 0.44, 95% CI (-0.11, 0.99), P = 0.12, Certainty of evidence: Moderate). Meta-analyses showed that CHM in combination with WCM was better than WCM in TER (RR = 1.16, 95% CI (1.07, 1.27), P = 0.0004, Certainty of evidence: High), while had comparable clinically effects with WCM according to HAMD-17 score (MD = -2.51, 95% CI (-3.24, -1.77), P < 0.00001, Certainty of evidence: Moderate). In additional, CHM were associated with less adverse events than WCM, and adding CHM to WCM reduced adverse events.

CONCLUSION:
The findings of present systematic review, at least to a certain extent, provided supporting evidence for the routine use of CHM for depression.

Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

국문초록

Language

영어

첨부파일