中国全科医学 ›› 2024, Vol. 27 ›› Issue (23): 2921-2930.DOI: 10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2023.0727

所属专题: 神经系统疾病最新文章合集 脑健康最新研究合集

• 医学循证 • 上一篇    下一篇

非药物治疗脑卒中后肩手综合征有效性的网状Meta分析

黄腾佳1, 曹曦1, 陈蕾1, 李子滢1, 秦莉花1,2,*()   

  1. 1.410208 湖南省长沙市,湖南中医药大学护理学院
    2.410208 湖南省长沙市,湖南中医药大学中西医结合心脑疾病防治湖南省重点实验室
  • 收稿日期:2023-11-10 修回日期:2024-03-16 出版日期:2024-08-15 发布日期:2024-05-08
  • 通讯作者: 秦莉花

  • 作者贡献:

    黄腾佳负责文章的构思、设计、分析与撰写;曹曦、陈蕾、李子滢负责数据的整理及筛选;秦莉花负责对研究过程进行监督管理以及论文最终版的审校和修订。

  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金资助项目(81904180); 湖南省自然科学基金资助项目(2023JJ50035,2024JJ8124); 湖南省卫生健康委科研计划课题(B202319018677); 湖南省中医药科研计划项目(A2024001); 湖南省社会科学成果评审委员会课题成果(XSP2023FXC066,XSP24YBC413)

The Effectiveness of Non-pharmacological Treatment for Post-stroke Shoulder-hand Syndrome: a Network Meta-analysis

HUANG Tengjia1, CAO Xi1, CHEN Lei1, LI Ziying1, QIN Lihua1,2,*()   

  1. 1. School of Nursing, Hunan University of Chinese Medicine, Changsha 410208, China
    2. Hunan Key Laboratory of Integrated Chinese and Western Medicine for Prevention and Treatment of Heart and Brain Diseases of Hunan University of Chinese Medicine, Changsha 410208, China
  • Received:2023-11-10 Revised:2024-03-16 Published:2024-08-15 Online:2024-05-08
  • Contact: QIN Lihua

摘要: 背景 肩手综合征是脑卒中患者致残的主要因素之一,严重影响患者身心健康及生活质量。目前,治疗脑卒中后肩手综合征的非药物干预方式众多,但临床上优选何种非药物治疗方式尚有一定困扰。 目的 使用网状Meta分析评价7种非药物治疗方式改善脑卒中后肩手综合征疗效、疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)及简式肢体运动功能量表(FMA)评分的差异,为临床决策提供循证支持。 方法 计算机检索中国知网、万方数据知识服务平台、维普网、中国生物医学文献服务系统、PubMed、Embase、Cochrane Library数据库中有关非药物治疗脑卒中后肩手综合征的随机对照试验,检索时间设定为建库至2023年6月。由2名研究员根据研究设计独立筛查文献与数据提取,使用RevMan 5.3、Stata 15.0软件进行网状Meta分析。 结果 共纳入62项研究,共5 090例患者,干预措施包含针灸疗法、中药熏蒸疗法、体外冲击波疗法、艾灸疗法、热敷疗法、电刺激疗法、中药泡洗疗法。网状Meta分析结果显示:7种非药物治疗方式在改善肩手综合征患者总有效率、FMA评分方面均优于对照组(P<0.05);除艾灸疗法外,6种非药物治疗方式在改善肩手综合征患者VAS评分方面均优于对照组(P<0.05)。7种非药物治疗方式改善总有效率的累积排序概率图下面积(SUCRA)依次为:针灸疗法(86.1%)>中药泡洗疗法(77.1%)>中药熏蒸疗法(54.7%)>体外冲击波疗法(53.1%)>热敷疗法(49.0%)>电刺激疗法(48.4%)>艾灸疗法(31.1%)>常规对照治疗(0.4%)。7种非药物治疗方式改善VAS评分的SUCRA依次为:热敷疗法(81.3%)>中药泡洗疗法(78.4%)>针灸疗法(76.7%)>电刺激疗法(58.4%)>中药熏蒸疗法(52.7%)>体外冲击波疗法(32.9%)>艾灸疗法(18.1%)>常规对照治疗(1.5%)。7种非药物治疗改善FMA评分的SUCRA依次为:中药泡洗疗法(90.6%)>针灸疗法(83.5%)>中药熏蒸疗法(59.9%)>电刺激疗法(59.8%)>体外冲击波疗法(42.3%)>艾灸疗法(39.7%)>热敷疗法(24.1%)>常规对照治疗(0.2%)。 结论 与常规治疗相比,使用或联合非药物治疗方式在治疗脑卒中后肩手综合征的疗效更佳,由于受到原始研究限制,以上结论仍需开展更多临床试验以期论证。

关键词: 肩手综合征, 非药物治疗, 脑卒中, 随机对照试验, 网状Meta分析

Abstract:

Background

Shoulder-hand syndrome is one of the major disabling factors for stroke patients, which seriously affects their physical and psychological health as well as their quality of life. Currently, there are many non-pharmacologic treatments used to treat post-stroke shoulder-hand syndrome, but there is still some confusion about which non-pharmacologic treatment modality is more effective in clinical practice.

Objective

To provide evidence-based support for clinical decision-making, this network meta-analysis evaluates the efficacy of seven non-pharmacological treatments in improving outcomes for post-stroke shoulder-hand syndrome, pain as measured by the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and scores on the simplified Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) .

Methods

A computerized search of databases including CNKI, Wanfang Data, VIP, China Biomedical Literature Service System, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library was conducted for randomized controlled trials on non-pharmacological treatments for post-stroke shoulder-hand syndrome up to June 2023. Two researchers independently screened the literature and extracted data, performing the network meta-analysis using RevMan 5.3 and Stata 15.0.

Results

The analysis included 62 studies involving 5 090 patients, assessing interventions such as acupuncture, herbal fumigation, extracorporeal shockwave therapy, moxibustion, herbal hot compress, electrical stimulation, and herbal soak. Results showed that all seven non-pharmacological treatments were superior to the control group in improving overall effectiveness, and FMA scores (P<0.05). Except for moxibustion, the six non-pharmacological treatments were superior to the control group in improving VAS scores in patients with shoulder hand syndrome (P<0.05). In terms of improving overall effectiveness, the cumulative ranking probability area (SUCRA) scores for the treatments were: acupuncture (86.1%), herbal soak (77.1%), herbal fumigation (54.7%), extracorporeal shockwave (53.1%), hot compress (49.0%), electrical stimulation (48.4%), and moxibustion (31.1%), with conventional control treatment at (0.4%). For VAS score improvement, the SUCRA scores were: hot compress (81.3%), herbal soak (78.4%), acupuncture (76.7%), electrical stimulation (58.4%), herbal fumigation (52.7%), extracorporeal shockwave (32.9%), moxibustion (18.1%), and conventional control (1.5%). For FMA score improvement, the SUCRA scores were: herbal soak (90.6%), acupuncture (83.5%), herbal fumigation (59.9%), electrical stimulation (59.8%), extracorporeal shockwave (42.3%), moxibustion (39.7%), hot compress (24.1%), and conventional control (0.2%) .

Conclusion

Compared to conventional treatments, the use or combination of non-pharmacological treatments yields better therapeutic outcomes for treating post-stroke shoulder-hand syndrome. However, due to limitations in the original studies, these conclusions need to be substantiated by further clinical trials.

Key words: Shoulder-hand syndrome, Non-pharmacological treatment, Stroke, Randomized controlled trial, Network meta-analysis