Qingyong Zheng, Ya Gao, Lu Xiong, Hengyi Huang, Junfen Li, Guoyuan OuYang, Wulayin Saimire, Jingjing Yang, Yu Zhang, Xiaopeng Wang, Xiaofeng Luo
{"title":"中草药与新冠肺炎:临床指南和专家共识的质量评估和关键建议的分析。","authors":"Qingyong Zheng, Ya Gao, Lu Xiong, Hengyi Huang, Junfen Li, Guoyuan OuYang, Wulayin Saimire, Jingjing Yang, Yu Zhang, Xiaopeng Wang, Xiaofeng Luo","doi":"10.1097/HM9.0000000000000043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To systematically review the clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the treatment of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) using Chinese herbal medicine (CHM), assess the methodological quality as well as clinical credibility and implementability of specific recommendations, and summarize key recommendations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>As of April 2022, we conducted a comprehensive search on major electronic databases, guideline websites, academic society websites, and government websites to assess the methodological quality and clinical applicability of the included CPGs using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II tool and Evaluation-Recommendations EXcellence (AGREE-REX) instructions, respectively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The search yielded 61 CPGs, which were mostly published in 2020; moreover, 98.4% of the CPGs were published in China. Only five CPGs achieved a high-quality AGREE II rating; further, six CPGs could be directly recommended, with most of the CPGs still showing much room for improvement. CPGs had a low overall score in the AGREE-REX evaluation, with the domains of clinical applicability, values and preferences, and implementability being standardized in 21.80% ± 12.56%, 16.00% ± 11.81%, and 31.33% ± 14.55% of the CPGs, respectively. Five high-quality CPGs mentioned 56 Chinese herbal formulas. Half of the recommendations had moderate or strong evidence level in the GRADE evaluation. The most frequently recommended herbal medicines were Lianhua Qingwen granule/capsule and Jinhua Qinggan granule; however, the strength of recommendation for each prescription varied across CPGs and populations.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The overall quality of current CPGs for COVID-19 for CHM still needs to be improved; moreover, the strength of the evidence remains to be standardized across CPGs.</p><p><strong>Graphical abstract: </strong>http://links.lww.com/AHM/A34.</p>","PeriodicalId":93856,"journal":{"name":"Acupuncture and herbal medicine","volume":"2 3","pages":"152-161"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/d2/4c/hm9-2-152.PMC9746251.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Chinese herbal medicine and COVID-19: quality evaluation of clinical guidelines and expert consensus and analysis of key recommendations.\",\"authors\":\"Qingyong Zheng, Ya Gao, Lu Xiong, Hengyi Huang, Junfen Li, Guoyuan OuYang, Wulayin Saimire, Jingjing Yang, Yu Zhang, Xiaopeng Wang, Xiaofeng Luo\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/HM9.0000000000000043\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>To systematically review the clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the treatment of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) using Chinese herbal medicine (CHM), assess the methodological quality as well as clinical credibility and implementability of specific recommendations, and summarize key recommendations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>As of April 2022, we conducted a comprehensive search on major electronic databases, guideline websites, academic society websites, and government websites to assess the methodological quality and clinical applicability of the included CPGs using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II tool and Evaluation-Recommendations EXcellence (AGREE-REX) instructions, respectively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The search yielded 61 CPGs, which were mostly published in 2020; moreover, 98.4% of the CPGs were published in China. Only five CPGs achieved a high-quality AGREE II rating; further, six CPGs could be directly recommended, with most of the CPGs still showing much room for improvement. CPGs had a low overall score in the AGREE-REX evaluation, with the domains of clinical applicability, values and preferences, and implementability being standardized in 21.80% ± 12.56%, 16.00% ± 11.81%, and 31.33% ± 14.55% of the CPGs, respectively. Five high-quality CPGs mentioned 56 Chinese herbal formulas. Half of the recommendations had moderate or strong evidence level in the GRADE evaluation. The most frequently recommended herbal medicines were Lianhua Qingwen granule/capsule and Jinhua Qinggan granule; however, the strength of recommendation for each prescription varied across CPGs and populations.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The overall quality of current CPGs for COVID-19 for CHM still needs to be improved; moreover, the strength of the evidence remains to be standardized across CPGs.</p><p><strong>Graphical abstract: </strong>http://links.lww.com/AHM/A34.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93856,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acupuncture and herbal medicine\",\"volume\":\"2 3\",\"pages\":\"152-161\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/d2/4c/hm9-2-152.PMC9746251.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acupuncture and herbal medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/HM9.0000000000000043\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/12/8 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acupuncture and herbal medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/HM9.0000000000000043","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/12/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Chinese herbal medicine and COVID-19: quality evaluation of clinical guidelines and expert consensus and analysis of key recommendations.
To systematically review the clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the treatment of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) using Chinese herbal medicine (CHM), assess the methodological quality as well as clinical credibility and implementability of specific recommendations, and summarize key recommendations.
Methods: As of April 2022, we conducted a comprehensive search on major electronic databases, guideline websites, academic society websites, and government websites to assess the methodological quality and clinical applicability of the included CPGs using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II tool and Evaluation-Recommendations EXcellence (AGREE-REX) instructions, respectively.
Results: The search yielded 61 CPGs, which were mostly published in 2020; moreover, 98.4% of the CPGs were published in China. Only five CPGs achieved a high-quality AGREE II rating; further, six CPGs could be directly recommended, with most of the CPGs still showing much room for improvement. CPGs had a low overall score in the AGREE-REX evaluation, with the domains of clinical applicability, values and preferences, and implementability being standardized in 21.80% ± 12.56%, 16.00% ± 11.81%, and 31.33% ± 14.55% of the CPGs, respectively. Five high-quality CPGs mentioned 56 Chinese herbal formulas. Half of the recommendations had moderate or strong evidence level in the GRADE evaluation. The most frequently recommended herbal medicines were Lianhua Qingwen granule/capsule and Jinhua Qinggan granule; however, the strength of recommendation for each prescription varied across CPGs and populations.
Conclusions: The overall quality of current CPGs for COVID-19 for CHM still needs to be improved; moreover, the strength of the evidence remains to be standardized across CPGs.