Chinese General Practice ›› 2023, Vol. 26 ›› Issue (21): 2647-2658.DOI: 10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2022.0627
• Evidence-based Medicine • Previous Articles Next Articles
Received:
2022-06-01
Revised:
2022-09-19
Published:
2023-07-20
Online:
2022-11-24
Contact:
ZHAI Jinguo
通讯作者:
翟巾帼
作者简介:
基金资助:
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: https://www.chinagp.net/EN/10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2022.0627
步骤 | 检索式 |
---|---|
#1 | breech presentation[MeSH] OR breech presentation[Title/Abstract] OR presentation breech[Title/Abstract] OR breech fetal[Title/Abstract] OR incomplete breech[Title/Abstract] OR complete breech[Title/Abstract] OR frank breech[Title/Abstract] OR transverse lie[Title/Abstract] OR labor presentation[Title/Abstract] |
#2 | posture[MeSH] OR posture*[Title/Abstract] OR position[Title/Abstract] OR knee*[Title/Abstract] OR hand*[Title/Abstract] OR sims[Title/Abstract] OR stand*[Title/Abstract] OR squat*[Title/Abstract] OR seat*[Title/Abstract] OR upright[Title/Abstract] OR waist[Title/Abstract] OR knee-chest[Title/Abstract] OR breath*[Title/Abstract] OR delivery ball[Title/Abstract] OR birth ball[Title/Abstract] |
#3 | acupuncture[MeSH] OR moxibustion[Title/Abstract] OR acupuncture[Title/Abstract] OR zhiyin[Title/Abstract] OR BL 67[Title/Abstract] |
#4 | "version,fetal" [MeSH] OR "version,fetal" [Title/Abstract] OR external cephalic version[Title/Abstract] OR pelvic rotation[Title/Abstract] OR external[Title/Abstract] OR reversal[Title/Abstract] |
#5 | #2 OR #3 OR #4 |
#6 | Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic[MeSH] OR Randomized Controlled Trial[Publication Type] OR Randomized Controlled Trial[Title/Abstract] OR RCT[Title/Abstract] |
#7 | #1 AND #5 AND #6 |
Table 1 Strategy for searching RCTs of the effects of different interventions for breech or transverse lie position on maternal and neonatal outcomes in PubMed database
步骤 | 检索式 |
---|---|
#1 | breech presentation[MeSH] OR breech presentation[Title/Abstract] OR presentation breech[Title/Abstract] OR breech fetal[Title/Abstract] OR incomplete breech[Title/Abstract] OR complete breech[Title/Abstract] OR frank breech[Title/Abstract] OR transverse lie[Title/Abstract] OR labor presentation[Title/Abstract] |
#2 | posture[MeSH] OR posture*[Title/Abstract] OR position[Title/Abstract] OR knee*[Title/Abstract] OR hand*[Title/Abstract] OR sims[Title/Abstract] OR stand*[Title/Abstract] OR squat*[Title/Abstract] OR seat*[Title/Abstract] OR upright[Title/Abstract] OR waist[Title/Abstract] OR knee-chest[Title/Abstract] OR breath*[Title/Abstract] OR delivery ball[Title/Abstract] OR birth ball[Title/Abstract] |
#3 | acupuncture[MeSH] OR moxibustion[Title/Abstract] OR acupuncture[Title/Abstract] OR zhiyin[Title/Abstract] OR BL 67[Title/Abstract] |
#4 | "version,fetal" [MeSH] OR "version,fetal" [Title/Abstract] OR external cephalic version[Title/Abstract] OR pelvic rotation[Title/Abstract] OR external[Title/Abstract] OR reversal[Title/Abstract] |
#5 | #2 OR #3 OR #4 |
#6 | Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic[MeSH] OR Randomized Controlled Trial[Publication Type] OR Randomized Controlled Trial[Title/Abstract] OR RCT[Title/Abstract] |
#7 | #1 AND #5 AND #6 |
第一作者 | 发表时间(年) | 国家 | 样本量(T/C) | 年龄(T/C) (岁) | 孕周(T/C) (周) | 孕产次(T/C) | 干预措施 | 结局指标 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
彭朝梨[ | 2021 | 中国 | 192/192 | 31.5±2.2/31.3±2.2 | 38.7±0.8/38.4±0.8 | 初产妇:121/124;经产妇:71/68 | T:硫酸特布他林抑制宫缩,硬膜外麻醉下实施ECV;C:膝胸卧位,2次/d,10~15 min/次,干预时长为1周 | ①② |
唐小媚[ | 2020 | 中国 | 30/30 | 29.3±2.3/29.3±2.3 | 39.0±0.2/39.0±0.2 | 初产妇:20/22;经产妇:10/8 | T:硫酸特布他林抑制宫缩,硬膜外麻醉下实施ECV;C:膝胸卧位,2次/d,10~15 min/次,干预时长为1周 | ①② |
林岸芸[ | 2020 | 中国 | 80/80 | 29.0±3.5/30.0±3.7 | 30.0~32.0 | 未提及 | T:分娩球运动,3~4次/周;C:膝胸卧位,2次/d,15 min/次 | ①② |
廖琪[ | 2018 | 中国 | 100/100 | 26.6±4.3/26.3±4.5 | 31.7±1.6/31.4±1.5 | 未提及 | T:艾条悬灸至阴穴30 min,灸毕行膝胸卧位15 min,2次/d;C:行膝胸卧位15 min,2次/d,为期2周 | ①② |
HAMIDZADEH[ | 2022 | 伊朗 | 69/69 | 24.9±2.4/24.7±2.7 | 33.1±1.1/32.9±1.10 | 初产妇:44/40;经产妇:25/29 | T:按压至阴穴,10 min/次,为期2周;C:接受常规护理 | ①②③ |
DOCHEZ[ | 2020 | 法国 | 74/76 | 32.9±5.6/31.0±4.6 | >36.0 | 初产妇:40/42;经产妇:34/34 | T:吸入一氧化二氮之后实施ECV;C:吸入医用空气之后实施ECV | ①②③④ |
SOURANI[ | 2020 | 伊朗 | 32/32 | 28.1±4.5/30.7±7.0 | 39.0±1.9/38.4±1.3 | 初产妇:16/17;经产妇:16/15 | T:塑料夹对至阴穴进行刺激,20 min/次,2次/d,为期2周;C:不进行穴位刺激 | ①② |
ZOBBI[ | 2017 | 意大利 | 82/82 | 31.2±5.1/31.6±4.9 | >37.0 | 初产妇:61/21;经产妇:61/21 | T:在实施ECV前2 h喝2 000 mL水;C:在实施ECV前2 h喝水不超过100 mL | ① |
WANG[ | 2017 | 中国 | 72/72 | 33.2±4.6/32.9±5.1 | 37.0~41.0 | 初产妇:41/37;经产妇:31/35 | T:瑞芬太尼静脉镇痛后实施ECV;C:静脉使用安慰剂后实施ECV | ①②④ |
VELZEL[ | 2017 | 荷兰 | 416/414 | 32.1±4.0/32.4±4.3 | 35.8±0.9/35.9±1.0 | 初产妇:256/255;经产妇:154/153 | T:阿托西班抑制宫缩后实施ECV;C:非诺特罗抑制宫缩后实施ECV | ①②③ |
SANANES[ | 2016 | 法国 | 130/129 | 30.5±4.6/30.4±4.6 | 33.7±0.8/33.6±0.8 | 初产妇:71/80;经产妇:59/49 | T:针灸至阴穴,并用打火机加热针尖,30 min/次,治疗3次;C:针灸厉兑穴,并用打火机加热针尖,30 min/次,治疗3次 | ①②③ |
LIU[ | 2016 | 中国 | 76/76 | 34.1±4.2/33.8±3.9 | 37.0~41.0 | 初产妇:45/42;经产妇:31/34 | T:瑞芬太尼静脉镇痛后实施ECV;C:静脉使用安慰剂(0.9%氯化钠溶液)后实施ECV | ①②④ |
BURGOS[ | 2016 | 西班牙 | 60/60 | 34.8±4.0/35.1±5.0 | 37.0~41.0 | 初产妇:40/42;经产妇:20/18 | T:瑞芬太尼静脉镇痛后实施ECV;C:吸入使用一氧化二氮后实施ECV | ①② |
VALLIKKANNU [ | 2014 | 马来西亚 | 48/47 | 31.1±4.5/29.5±4.0 | 37.5(37.4~37.9)/37.8(37.4~38.2) | 初产妇:19/27;经产妇:29/20 | T:在孕妇腹部使用滑石粉后实施ECV;C:在孕妇腹部使用凝胶后实施ECV | ①②③④ |
COULON[ | 2014 | 法国 | 164/164 | 30.2±4.8/30.7±4.4 | 34.5±0.6/34.5±0.6 | 初产妇:95/92;经产妇:69/72 | T:艾灸与针灸至阴穴,20 min/次;C:灭活激光照射至阴穴,20 min/次,共6次,在48 h内完成 | ①②③ |
MUÑOZ[ | 2014 | 西班牙 | 31/29 | 32.9±4.9/32.5±5.7 | 36.0~41.0 | 初产妇:18/16;经产妇:13/12 | T:瑞芬太尼静脉镇痛后实施ECV;C:静脉使用安慰剂(0.9%氯化钠溶液)后实施ECV | ①②④ |
VAS[ | 2013 | 西班牙 | 136/136/134 | 31.5(22.6~39.0)/32.0(24.4~38.0)/31.0(24.0~38.3) | 34.0(33.0~35.0) | 初产妇:73/77/81;经产妇:63/59/53 | T1:艾灸至阴穴加常规护理,20 min/次,1次/d,为期2周;T2:艾灸隐白穴加常规护理,20 min/次,1次/d,为期2周;C:接受常规护理 | ①②③ |
HUTTON[ | 2011 | 多国 | 767/774 | 30.0(18.9~39.2)/30.0(19.8~39.2) | 34.7(33.1~35.7)/34.9(33.3~35.7) | 初产妇:409/411;经产妇:358/363 | T:未足月(34~36周)实施ECV;C:足月(37~38周)实施ECV | ①②③ |
DO[ | 2011 | 澳大利亚 | 10/10 | 30.4±3.1/24.6±5.2 | 34.8±0.7/35.6±0.7 | 初产妇:7/9;经产妇:3/1 | T:艾灸至阴穴,20 min/次,2次/d,为期10 d;C:常规护理干预 | ①②③ |
WEINIGER[ | 2010 | 以色列 | 31/33 | 28.5(21.0~40.0)/28.6(20.0~36.0) | 38.1±0.9/38.2±1.1 | 初产妇:13/21;经产妇:18/12 | T:布比卡因椎管内麻醉(腰麻)后实施ECV;C:无镇痛实施ECV | ①②④ |
VANI[ | 2009 | 马来西亚 | 57/57 | 28.2±4.8/28.7±4.3 | 38.0±0.6/38.0±0.7 | 初产妇:31/27;经产妇:26/30 | T:静脉推注宫缩抑制剂沙丁胺醇后实施ECV;C:实施ECV前不使用宫缩抑制剂 | ①② |
HILTON[ | 2009 | 加拿大 | 65/61 | 初产妇:30.0±5.0/29.0±4.0;经产妇:31.0±5.0/32.0±5.0 | 初产妇:37.0±0.7/37.7±0.7;经产妇:37.7±0.7/37.6±0.4 | 初产妇:42/40;经产妇:23/21 | T:接受静脉推注宫缩抑制剂硝酸甘油后实施ECV;C:实施ECV前不使用宫缩抑制剂 | ①②③ |
GUITTIER[ | 2009 | 瑞士 | 106/106 | 32.0±4.3/32.0±4.2 | 35.0±0.8/34.8±0.7 | 初产妇:75/64;经产妇:31/42 | T:艾灸至阴穴,20 min/次,3次/周,为期2周;C:只接受常规护理 | ①②③ |
COLLARIS[ | 2009 | 马来西亚 | 44/46 | 30.0±5.0/30.0±5.0 | 38.0±1.0/38.0±1.0 | 初产妇:23/25;经产妇:21/21 | T:口服宫缩抑制剂硝苯地平后实施ECV;C:皮下注射特布他林宫缩抑制剂后实施ECV | ①②③ |
MOHAMED ISMAIL[ | 2008 | 马来西亚 | 43/43 | 28.5±4.1/29.9±5.2 | 37.8±0.8/37.5±0.4 | 初产妇:18/21;经产妇:25/22 | T:口服宫缩抑制剂硝苯地平后实施ECV;C:静脉注射特布他林宫缩抑制剂后实施ECV | ①② |
KOK[ | 2008 | 荷兰 | 154/156 | 33.6±4.2/34.1±4.5 | 37.0±0.8/37.0±0.9 | 初产妇:78/83;经产妇:76/73 | T:口服宫缩抑制剂硝苯地平后实施ECV;C:实施ECV前不使用宫缩抑制剂 | ①②③ |
FOUNDS[ | 2006 | 美国 | 14/11 | 未提及 | 34.0~38.0 | 初产妇:9/4;经产妇:5/7 | T:膝胸卧位,15 min/次,3次/d,干预时长为1周;C:常规护理干预 | ①②③ |
NOR AZLIN[ | 2005 | 马来西亚 | 30/30 | 29.1±4.5/27.5±4.3 | >37.0 | 初产妇:22/23;经产妇:8/7 | T:静脉滴注宫缩抑制剂盐酸利托君后实施ECV;C:实施ECV前不使用宫缩抑制剂 | ①②③ |
EL-SAYED[ | 2004 | 美国 | 30/29 | 31.1±5.6/31.7±4.8 | 38.4±0.7/38.4±0.8 | 初产妇:17/18;经产妇:13/11 | T:静脉注射宫缩抑制剂硝酸甘油后实施ECV;C:皮下注射特布他林宫缩抑制剂后实施ECV | ①② |
MANCUSO[ | 2000 | 美国 | 54/54 | 28.5±4.8/28.2±4.8 | 38.1±1.2/37.9±1.0 | 初产妇:30/29;经产妇:24/25 | T:利多卡因和芬太尼椎管内麻醉(硬膜外麻醉)后实施ECV;C:无镇痛实施ECV | ①②③ |
SMITH[ | 1999 | 澳大利亚 | 51/49 | 29.1±4.0/29.2±5.0 | 36.5±0.6/37.0±0.5 | 初产妇:27/30;经产妇:24/19 | T:指导其采取膝胸卧位,15 min/次,3次/d,干预时长为1周;C:常规护理干预 | ①②③ |
DUGOFF[ | 1999 | 美国 | 50/52 | 24.3±0.9/26.8±0.9 | 38.0±0.2/38.0±0.2 | 未提及 | T:舒芬太尼和布比卡因椎管内麻醉(腰麻)后实施ECV;C:无镇痛实施ECV | ①②③ |
CARDINI[ | 1998 | 中国 | 130/130 | 25.5±2.5/25.2±3.0 | 33.0 | 未提及 | T:艾灸至阴穴,30 min/次,1~2次/d,为期1~2周;C:常规护理干预 | ①②③ |
SCHORR[ | 1997 | 美国 | 35/34 | 27.7±6.1/25.8±6.6 | 38.0±2.3/37.4±2.1 | 初产妇:14/16;经产妇:21/18 | T:利多卡因和肾上腺素椎管内麻醉(硬膜外麻醉)后实施ECV;C:无镇痛实施ECV | ①② |
MARQUETTE[ | 1996 | 加拿大 | 138/145 | 28.5±0.4/29.3±0.4 | 37.4±0.1/37.3±0.1 | 初产妇:58/49;经产妇:80/96 | T:静脉注射宫缩抑制剂利托君后实施ECV;C:静脉注射安慰剂后实施ECV | ① |
CHENIA[ | 1987 | 津巴布韦 | 39/37 | 25.4±6.0/26.8±6.2 | 38.2±1.6/38.6±1.9 | 初产妇:11/4;经产妇:28/33 | T:膝胸卧位,15 min/次,3次/d,干预时长为1周;C:常规护理干预 | ①②③ |
Table 2 Basic characteristics of included literature
第一作者 | 发表时间(年) | 国家 | 样本量(T/C) | 年龄(T/C) (岁) | 孕周(T/C) (周) | 孕产次(T/C) | 干预措施 | 结局指标 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
彭朝梨[ | 2021 | 中国 | 192/192 | 31.5±2.2/31.3±2.2 | 38.7±0.8/38.4±0.8 | 初产妇:121/124;经产妇:71/68 | T:硫酸特布他林抑制宫缩,硬膜外麻醉下实施ECV;C:膝胸卧位,2次/d,10~15 min/次,干预时长为1周 | ①② |
唐小媚[ | 2020 | 中国 | 30/30 | 29.3±2.3/29.3±2.3 | 39.0±0.2/39.0±0.2 | 初产妇:20/22;经产妇:10/8 | T:硫酸特布他林抑制宫缩,硬膜外麻醉下实施ECV;C:膝胸卧位,2次/d,10~15 min/次,干预时长为1周 | ①② |
林岸芸[ | 2020 | 中国 | 80/80 | 29.0±3.5/30.0±3.7 | 30.0~32.0 | 未提及 | T:分娩球运动,3~4次/周;C:膝胸卧位,2次/d,15 min/次 | ①② |
廖琪[ | 2018 | 中国 | 100/100 | 26.6±4.3/26.3±4.5 | 31.7±1.6/31.4±1.5 | 未提及 | T:艾条悬灸至阴穴30 min,灸毕行膝胸卧位15 min,2次/d;C:行膝胸卧位15 min,2次/d,为期2周 | ①② |
HAMIDZADEH[ | 2022 | 伊朗 | 69/69 | 24.9±2.4/24.7±2.7 | 33.1±1.1/32.9±1.10 | 初产妇:44/40;经产妇:25/29 | T:按压至阴穴,10 min/次,为期2周;C:接受常规护理 | ①②③ |
DOCHEZ[ | 2020 | 法国 | 74/76 | 32.9±5.6/31.0±4.6 | >36.0 | 初产妇:40/42;经产妇:34/34 | T:吸入一氧化二氮之后实施ECV;C:吸入医用空气之后实施ECV | ①②③④ |
SOURANI[ | 2020 | 伊朗 | 32/32 | 28.1±4.5/30.7±7.0 | 39.0±1.9/38.4±1.3 | 初产妇:16/17;经产妇:16/15 | T:塑料夹对至阴穴进行刺激,20 min/次,2次/d,为期2周;C:不进行穴位刺激 | ①② |
ZOBBI[ | 2017 | 意大利 | 82/82 | 31.2±5.1/31.6±4.9 | >37.0 | 初产妇:61/21;经产妇:61/21 | T:在实施ECV前2 h喝2 000 mL水;C:在实施ECV前2 h喝水不超过100 mL | ① |
WANG[ | 2017 | 中国 | 72/72 | 33.2±4.6/32.9±5.1 | 37.0~41.0 | 初产妇:41/37;经产妇:31/35 | T:瑞芬太尼静脉镇痛后实施ECV;C:静脉使用安慰剂后实施ECV | ①②④ |
VELZEL[ | 2017 | 荷兰 | 416/414 | 32.1±4.0/32.4±4.3 | 35.8±0.9/35.9±1.0 | 初产妇:256/255;经产妇:154/153 | T:阿托西班抑制宫缩后实施ECV;C:非诺特罗抑制宫缩后实施ECV | ①②③ |
SANANES[ | 2016 | 法国 | 130/129 | 30.5±4.6/30.4±4.6 | 33.7±0.8/33.6±0.8 | 初产妇:71/80;经产妇:59/49 | T:针灸至阴穴,并用打火机加热针尖,30 min/次,治疗3次;C:针灸厉兑穴,并用打火机加热针尖,30 min/次,治疗3次 | ①②③ |
LIU[ | 2016 | 中国 | 76/76 | 34.1±4.2/33.8±3.9 | 37.0~41.0 | 初产妇:45/42;经产妇:31/34 | T:瑞芬太尼静脉镇痛后实施ECV;C:静脉使用安慰剂(0.9%氯化钠溶液)后实施ECV | ①②④ |
BURGOS[ | 2016 | 西班牙 | 60/60 | 34.8±4.0/35.1±5.0 | 37.0~41.0 | 初产妇:40/42;经产妇:20/18 | T:瑞芬太尼静脉镇痛后实施ECV;C:吸入使用一氧化二氮后实施ECV | ①② |
VALLIKKANNU [ | 2014 | 马来西亚 | 48/47 | 31.1±4.5/29.5±4.0 | 37.5(37.4~37.9)/37.8(37.4~38.2) | 初产妇:19/27;经产妇:29/20 | T:在孕妇腹部使用滑石粉后实施ECV;C:在孕妇腹部使用凝胶后实施ECV | ①②③④ |
COULON[ | 2014 | 法国 | 164/164 | 30.2±4.8/30.7±4.4 | 34.5±0.6/34.5±0.6 | 初产妇:95/92;经产妇:69/72 | T:艾灸与针灸至阴穴,20 min/次;C:灭活激光照射至阴穴,20 min/次,共6次,在48 h内完成 | ①②③ |
MUÑOZ[ | 2014 | 西班牙 | 31/29 | 32.9±4.9/32.5±5.7 | 36.0~41.0 | 初产妇:18/16;经产妇:13/12 | T:瑞芬太尼静脉镇痛后实施ECV;C:静脉使用安慰剂(0.9%氯化钠溶液)后实施ECV | ①②④ |
VAS[ | 2013 | 西班牙 | 136/136/134 | 31.5(22.6~39.0)/32.0(24.4~38.0)/31.0(24.0~38.3) | 34.0(33.0~35.0) | 初产妇:73/77/81;经产妇:63/59/53 | T1:艾灸至阴穴加常规护理,20 min/次,1次/d,为期2周;T2:艾灸隐白穴加常规护理,20 min/次,1次/d,为期2周;C:接受常规护理 | ①②③ |
HUTTON[ | 2011 | 多国 | 767/774 | 30.0(18.9~39.2)/30.0(19.8~39.2) | 34.7(33.1~35.7)/34.9(33.3~35.7) | 初产妇:409/411;经产妇:358/363 | T:未足月(34~36周)实施ECV;C:足月(37~38周)实施ECV | ①②③ |
DO[ | 2011 | 澳大利亚 | 10/10 | 30.4±3.1/24.6±5.2 | 34.8±0.7/35.6±0.7 | 初产妇:7/9;经产妇:3/1 | T:艾灸至阴穴,20 min/次,2次/d,为期10 d;C:常规护理干预 | ①②③ |
WEINIGER[ | 2010 | 以色列 | 31/33 | 28.5(21.0~40.0)/28.6(20.0~36.0) | 38.1±0.9/38.2±1.1 | 初产妇:13/21;经产妇:18/12 | T:布比卡因椎管内麻醉(腰麻)后实施ECV;C:无镇痛实施ECV | ①②④ |
VANI[ | 2009 | 马来西亚 | 57/57 | 28.2±4.8/28.7±4.3 | 38.0±0.6/38.0±0.7 | 初产妇:31/27;经产妇:26/30 | T:静脉推注宫缩抑制剂沙丁胺醇后实施ECV;C:实施ECV前不使用宫缩抑制剂 | ①② |
HILTON[ | 2009 | 加拿大 | 65/61 | 初产妇:30.0±5.0/29.0±4.0;经产妇:31.0±5.0/32.0±5.0 | 初产妇:37.0±0.7/37.7±0.7;经产妇:37.7±0.7/37.6±0.4 | 初产妇:42/40;经产妇:23/21 | T:接受静脉推注宫缩抑制剂硝酸甘油后实施ECV;C:实施ECV前不使用宫缩抑制剂 | ①②③ |
GUITTIER[ | 2009 | 瑞士 | 106/106 | 32.0±4.3/32.0±4.2 | 35.0±0.8/34.8±0.7 | 初产妇:75/64;经产妇:31/42 | T:艾灸至阴穴,20 min/次,3次/周,为期2周;C:只接受常规护理 | ①②③ |
COLLARIS[ | 2009 | 马来西亚 | 44/46 | 30.0±5.0/30.0±5.0 | 38.0±1.0/38.0±1.0 | 初产妇:23/25;经产妇:21/21 | T:口服宫缩抑制剂硝苯地平后实施ECV;C:皮下注射特布他林宫缩抑制剂后实施ECV | ①②③ |
MOHAMED ISMAIL[ | 2008 | 马来西亚 | 43/43 | 28.5±4.1/29.9±5.2 | 37.8±0.8/37.5±0.4 | 初产妇:18/21;经产妇:25/22 | T:口服宫缩抑制剂硝苯地平后实施ECV;C:静脉注射特布他林宫缩抑制剂后实施ECV | ①② |
KOK[ | 2008 | 荷兰 | 154/156 | 33.6±4.2/34.1±4.5 | 37.0±0.8/37.0±0.9 | 初产妇:78/83;经产妇:76/73 | T:口服宫缩抑制剂硝苯地平后实施ECV;C:实施ECV前不使用宫缩抑制剂 | ①②③ |
FOUNDS[ | 2006 | 美国 | 14/11 | 未提及 | 34.0~38.0 | 初产妇:9/4;经产妇:5/7 | T:膝胸卧位,15 min/次,3次/d,干预时长为1周;C:常规护理干预 | ①②③ |
NOR AZLIN[ | 2005 | 马来西亚 | 30/30 | 29.1±4.5/27.5±4.3 | >37.0 | 初产妇:22/23;经产妇:8/7 | T:静脉滴注宫缩抑制剂盐酸利托君后实施ECV;C:实施ECV前不使用宫缩抑制剂 | ①②③ |
EL-SAYED[ | 2004 | 美国 | 30/29 | 31.1±5.6/31.7±4.8 | 38.4±0.7/38.4±0.8 | 初产妇:17/18;经产妇:13/11 | T:静脉注射宫缩抑制剂硝酸甘油后实施ECV;C:皮下注射特布他林宫缩抑制剂后实施ECV | ①② |
MANCUSO[ | 2000 | 美国 | 54/54 | 28.5±4.8/28.2±4.8 | 38.1±1.2/37.9±1.0 | 初产妇:30/29;经产妇:24/25 | T:利多卡因和芬太尼椎管内麻醉(硬膜外麻醉)后实施ECV;C:无镇痛实施ECV | ①②③ |
SMITH[ | 1999 | 澳大利亚 | 51/49 | 29.1±4.0/29.2±5.0 | 36.5±0.6/37.0±0.5 | 初产妇:27/30;经产妇:24/19 | T:指导其采取膝胸卧位,15 min/次,3次/d,干预时长为1周;C:常规护理干预 | ①②③ |
DUGOFF[ | 1999 | 美国 | 50/52 | 24.3±0.9/26.8±0.9 | 38.0±0.2/38.0±0.2 | 未提及 | T:舒芬太尼和布比卡因椎管内麻醉(腰麻)后实施ECV;C:无镇痛实施ECV | ①②③ |
CARDINI[ | 1998 | 中国 | 130/130 | 25.5±2.5/25.2±3.0 | 33.0 | 未提及 | T:艾灸至阴穴,30 min/次,1~2次/d,为期1~2周;C:常规护理干预 | ①②③ |
SCHORR[ | 1997 | 美国 | 35/34 | 27.7±6.1/25.8±6.6 | 38.0±2.3/37.4±2.1 | 初产妇:14/16;经产妇:21/18 | T:利多卡因和肾上腺素椎管内麻醉(硬膜外麻醉)后实施ECV;C:无镇痛实施ECV | ①② |
MARQUETTE[ | 1996 | 加拿大 | 138/145 | 28.5±0.4/29.3±0.4 | 37.4±0.1/37.3±0.1 | 初产妇:58/49;经产妇:80/96 | T:静脉注射宫缩抑制剂利托君后实施ECV;C:静脉注射安慰剂后实施ECV | ① |
CHENIA[ | 1987 | 津巴布韦 | 39/37 | 25.4±6.0/26.8±6.2 | 38.2±1.6/38.6±1.9 | 初产妇:11/4;经产妇:28/33 | T:膝胸卧位,15 min/次,3次/d,干预时长为1周;C:常规护理干预 | ①②③ |
Figure 2 Evidence of using different interventions to move a breech or transverse lie position to a head position from RCTs analyzed by network meta-analysis
Figure 3 Evidence of using different uterine contraction inhibitors before ECV to move a breech or transverse lie position to a head position from RCTs analyzed by network meta-analysis
Figure 4 Evidence of using ECV under different types of anesthesia to move a breech or transverse lie position to a head position from RCTs analyzed by network meta-analysis
干预措施 | 常规护理 | 艾灸/刺激至阴穴 | 膝胸卧位 | 艾灸至阴穴+膝胸卧位 |
---|---|---|---|---|
艾灸/刺激至阴穴 | 0.54(0.32,0.86) | — | — | — |
膝胸卧位 | 1.26(0.52,3.52) | 2.32(0.87,7.54) | — | — |
艾灸至阴穴+膝胸卧位 | 0.79(0.18,4.21) | 1.46(0.32,8.62) | 0.64(0.18,2.20) | — |
分娩球运动 | 0.82(0.19,4.33) | 1.50(0.33,8.86) | 0.65(0.19,2.27) | 1.03 (0.17,5.96) |
Table 3 Network meta-analysis comparing the success rate of using different interventions to move a breech or transverse lie position to a head position
干预措施 | 常规护理 | 艾灸/刺激至阴穴 | 膝胸卧位 | 艾灸至阴穴+膝胸卧位 |
---|---|---|---|---|
艾灸/刺激至阴穴 | 0.54(0.32,0.86) | — | — | — |
膝胸卧位 | 1.26(0.52,3.52) | 2.32(0.87,7.54) | — | — |
艾灸至阴穴+膝胸卧位 | 0.79(0.18,4.21) | 1.46(0.32,8.62) | 0.64(0.18,2.20) | — |
分娩球运动 | 0.82(0.19,4.33) | 1.50(0.33,8.86) | 0.65(0.19,2.27) | 1.03 (0.17,5.96) |
干预措施 | 常规护理 | 艾灸/刺激至阴穴 | 膝胸卧位 | 艾灸至阴穴+膝胸卧位 |
---|---|---|---|---|
艾灸/刺激至阴穴 | 0.67(0.36,1.12) | — | — | — |
膝胸卧位 | 1.15(0.47,3.00) | 1.73(0.63,5.60) | — | — |
艾灸至阴穴+膝胸卧位 | 1.15(0.21,6.80) | 1.72(0.30,11.86) | 1.00(0.23,4.37) | — |
分娩球运动 | 0.75(0.13,4.47) | 1.13 (0.19,7.76) | 0.65(0.15,2.91) | 0.66(0.08,5.36) |
Table 4 Network meta-analysis comparing the vaginal delivery rate with different interventions
干预措施 | 常规护理 | 艾灸/刺激至阴穴 | 膝胸卧位 | 艾灸至阴穴+膝胸卧位 |
---|---|---|---|---|
艾灸/刺激至阴穴 | 0.67(0.36,1.12) | — | — | — |
膝胸卧位 | 1.15(0.47,3.00) | 1.73(0.63,5.60) | — | — |
艾灸至阴穴+膝胸卧位 | 1.15(0.21,6.80) | 1.72(0.30,11.86) | 1.00(0.23,4.37) | — |
分娩球运动 | 0.75(0.13,4.47) | 1.13 (0.19,7.76) | 0.65(0.15,2.91) | 0.66(0.08,5.36) |
干预措施 | 常规护理 | 艾灸/刺激至阴穴 |
---|---|---|
艾灸/刺激至阴穴 | 0.69(0.39,1.13) | — |
膝胸卧位 | 1.26(0.54,3.06) | 1.83(0.70,5.31) |
Table 5 Network meta-analysis comparing the cephalic delivery rate with different interventions
干预措施 | 常规护理 | 艾灸/刺激至阴穴 |
---|---|---|
艾灸/刺激至阴穴 | 0.69(0.39,1.13) | — |
膝胸卧位 | 1.26(0.54,3.06) | 1.83(0.70,5.31) |
干预措施 | 经干预胎儿转为头位 | 阴道分娩 | 头位分娩 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SUCRA | 秩次 | SUCRA | 秩次 | SUCRA | 秩次 | |
常规护理 | 0.365 | 4 | 0.404 | 3 | 0.391 | 2 |
艾灸/刺激至阴穴 | 0.843 | 1 | 0.783 | 1 | 0.922 | 1 |
膝胸卧位 | 0.186 | 5 | 0.311 | 5 | 0.188 | 3 |
艾灸至阴穴+膝胸卧位 | 0.562 | 2 | 0.374 | 4 | — | — |
分娩球运动 | 0.544 | 3 | 0.628 | 2 | — | — |
Table 6 Successful probability of using different interventions to move a breech or transverse lie position to a head position and to deliver vaginally or cephalically in network meta-analysis ranked by SUCRA
干预措施 | 经干预胎儿转为头位 | 阴道分娩 | 头位分娩 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SUCRA | 秩次 | SUCRA | 秩次 | SUCRA | 秩次 | |
常规护理 | 0.365 | 4 | 0.404 | 3 | 0.391 | 2 |
艾灸/刺激至阴穴 | 0.843 | 1 | 0.783 | 1 | 0.922 | 1 |
膝胸卧位 | 0.186 | 5 | 0.311 | 5 | 0.188 | 3 |
艾灸至阴穴+膝胸卧位 | 0.562 | 2 | 0.374 | 4 | — | — |
分娩球运动 | 0.544 | 3 | 0.628 | 2 | — | — |
干预措施 | 无宫缩抑制剂 | 钙通道阻滞剂 | β2肾上腺素受体激动剂 | 缩宫素受体拮抗剂 |
---|---|---|---|---|
钙通道阻滞剂 | 0.89(0.53,1.41) | — | — | — |
β2肾上腺素受体激动剂 | 0.60(0.38,0.82) | 0.67(0.41,1.03) | — | — |
缩宫素受体拮抗剂 | 0.72(0.31,1.44) | 0.80(0.34,1.75) | 1.19(0.61,2.35) | — |
一氧化氮供体 | 0.92(0.47,1.76) | 1.03(0.49,2.26) | 1.55(0.83,3.13) | 1.29(0.53,3.47) |
Table 7 Network meta-analysis comparing the success rate of moving a breech or transverse lie position to a head position by use of different uterine contraction inhibitors before ECV
干预措施 | 无宫缩抑制剂 | 钙通道阻滞剂 | β2肾上腺素受体激动剂 | 缩宫素受体拮抗剂 |
---|---|---|---|---|
钙通道阻滞剂 | 0.89(0.53,1.41) | — | — | — |
β2肾上腺素受体激动剂 | 0.60(0.38,0.82) | 0.67(0.41,1.03) | — | — |
缩宫素受体拮抗剂 | 0.72(0.31,1.44) | 0.80(0.34,1.75) | 1.19(0.61,2.35) | — |
一氧化氮供体 | 0.92(0.47,1.76) | 1.03(0.49,2.26) | 1.55(0.83,3.13) | 1.29(0.53,3.47) |
干预措施 | 无宫缩抑制剂 | 钙通道阻滞剂 | β2肾上腺素受体激动剂 | 缩宫素受体拮抗剂 |
---|---|---|---|---|
钙通道阻滞剂 | 1.00(0.60,1.51) | — | — | — |
β2肾上腺素受体激动剂 | 0.60(0.39,0.89) | 0.60(0.39,0.95) | — | — |
缩宫素受体拮抗剂 | 0.67(0.32,1.33) | 0.67(0.33,1.42) | 1.12(0.62,2.01) | — |
一氧化氮供体 | 0.64(0.34,1.18) | 0.64(0.32,1.34) | 1.07(0.57,2.03) | 0.95(0.41,2.26) |
Table 8 Network meta-analysis comparing the vaginal delivery rate with different uterine contraction inhibitors before ECV
干预措施 | 无宫缩抑制剂 | 钙通道阻滞剂 | β2肾上腺素受体激动剂 | 缩宫素受体拮抗剂 |
---|---|---|---|---|
钙通道阻滞剂 | 1.00(0.60,1.51) | — | — | — |
β2肾上腺素受体激动剂 | 0.60(0.39,0.89) | 0.60(0.39,0.95) | — | — |
缩宫素受体拮抗剂 | 0.67(0.32,1.33) | 0.67(0.33,1.42) | 1.12(0.62,2.01) | — |
一氧化氮供体 | 0.64(0.34,1.18) | 0.64(0.32,1.34) | 1.07(0.57,2.03) | 0.95(0.41,2.26) |
干预措施 | 无宫缩抑制剂 | 钙通道阻滞剂 | β2肾上腺素受体激动剂 | 缩宫素受体拮抗剂 |
---|---|---|---|---|
钙通道阻滞剂 | 0.87(0.44,1.66) | — | — | — |
β2肾上腺素受体激动剂 | 0.52(0.24,1.07) | 0.60(0.29,1.19) | — | — |
缩宫素受体拮抗剂 | 0.61(0.21,1.70) | 0.70(0.25,1.91) | 1.16(0.55,2.45) | — |
一氧化氮供体 | 0.62(0.25,1.49) | 0.71(0.24,2.13) | 1.18(0.38,3.82) | 1.02(0.26,4.09) |
Table 9 Network meta-analysis comparing the cephalic delivery rate with different uterine contraction inhibitors before ECV
干预措施 | 无宫缩抑制剂 | 钙通道阻滞剂 | β2肾上腺素受体激动剂 | 缩宫素受体拮抗剂 |
---|---|---|---|---|
钙通道阻滞剂 | 0.87(0.44,1.66) | — | — | — |
β2肾上腺素受体激动剂 | 0.52(0.24,1.07) | 0.60(0.29,1.19) | — | — |
缩宫素受体拮抗剂 | 0.61(0.21,1.70) | 0.70(0.25,1.91) | 1.16(0.55,2.45) | — |
一氧化氮供体 | 0.62(0.25,1.49) | 0.71(0.24,2.13) | 1.18(0.38,3.82) | 1.02(0.26,4.09) |
宫缩抑制剂 | 经干预胎儿转为头位 | 阴道分娩 | 头位分娩 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SUCRA | 秩次 | SUCRA | 秩次 | SUCRA | 秩次 | |
无宫缩抑制剂 | 0.196 | 5 | 0.166 | 5 | 0.138 | 5 |
钙通道阻滞剂 | 0.379 | 3 | 0.182 | 4 | 0.298 | 4 |
β2肾上腺素受体激动剂 | 0.917 | 1 | 0.823 | 1 | 0.821 | 1 |
缩宫素受体拮抗剂 | 0.658 | 2 | 0.631 | 3 | 0.616 | 3 |
一氧化氮供体 | 0.350 | 4 | 0.698 | 2 | 0.627 | 2 |
Table 10 Successful probability of using different uterine contraction inhibitors before ECV to move a breech or transverse lie position to a head position and to deliver vaginally in network meta-analysis ranked by SUCRA
宫缩抑制剂 | 经干预胎儿转为头位 | 阴道分娩 | 头位分娩 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SUCRA | 秩次 | SUCRA | 秩次 | SUCRA | 秩次 | |
无宫缩抑制剂 | 0.196 | 5 | 0.166 | 5 | 0.138 | 5 |
钙通道阻滞剂 | 0.379 | 3 | 0.182 | 4 | 0.298 | 4 |
β2肾上腺素受体激动剂 | 0.917 | 1 | 0.823 | 1 | 0.821 | 1 |
缩宫素受体拮抗剂 | 0.658 | 2 | 0.631 | 3 | 0.616 | 3 |
一氧化氮供体 | 0.350 | 4 | 0.698 | 2 | 0.627 | 2 |
干预措施 | 无麻醉 | 静脉麻醉 | 椎管内麻醉 |
---|---|---|---|
静脉麻醉 | 0.71(0.53,0.96) | — | — |
椎管内麻醉 | 0.65(0.49,0.85) | 0.91(0.60,1.36) | — |
吸入麻醉 | 0.74(0.47,1.18) | 1.04(0.68,1.60) | 1.15(0.68,1.98) |
Table 11 Network meta-analysis comparing the success rate of moving a breech or transverse lie position to a head position by ECV under different anesthesia modes
干预措施 | 无麻醉 | 静脉麻醉 | 椎管内麻醉 |
---|---|---|---|
静脉麻醉 | 0.71(0.53,0.96) | — | — |
椎管内麻醉 | 0.65(0.49,0.85) | 0.91(0.60,1.36) | — |
吸入麻醉 | 0.74(0.47,1.18) | 1.04(0.68,1.60) | 1.15(0.68,1.98) |
干预措施 | 无麻醉 | 静脉麻醉 | 椎管内麻醉 |
---|---|---|---|
静脉麻醉 | 0.93(0.50,1.73) | — | — |
椎管内麻醉 | 0.77(0.41,1.35) | 0.82(0.34,1.90) | — |
吸入麻醉 | 0.87(0.36,2.07) | 0.93(0.39,2.23) | 1.13(0.40,3.36) |
Table 12 Vaginal delivery rates intervened by ECV under different anesthesia modes
干预措施 | 无麻醉 | 静脉麻醉 | 椎管内麻醉 |
---|---|---|---|
静脉麻醉 | 0.93(0.50,1.73) | — | — |
椎管内麻醉 | 0.77(0.41,1.35) | 0.82(0.34,1.90) | — |
吸入麻醉 | 0.87(0.36,2.07) | 0.93(0.39,2.23) | 1.13(0.40,3.36) |
麻醉方式 | 经干预胎儿转为头位 | 阴道分娩 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
SUCRA | 秩次 | SUCRA | 秩次 | |
无麻醉 | 0.036 | 4 | 0.297 | 4 |
静脉麻醉 | 0.623 | 2 | 0.438 | 3 |
椎管内麻醉 | 0.801 | 1 | 0.724 | 1 |
吸入麻醉 | 0.540 | 3 | 0.541 | 2 |
Table 13 Successful probability of different anesthesia modes used to move a breech or transverse lie position to a head position and to deliver vaginally in network meta-analysis ranked by SUCRA
麻醉方式 | 经干预胎儿转为头位 | 阴道分娩 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
SUCRA | 秩次 | SUCRA | 秩次 | |
无麻醉 | 0.036 | 4 | 0.297 | 4 |
静脉麻醉 | 0.623 | 2 | 0.438 | 3 |
椎管内麻醉 | 0.801 | 1 | 0.724 | 1 |
吸入麻醉 | 0.540 | 3 | 0.541 | 2 |
Figure 6 Funnel plot assessing the effects of using different interventions to move a breech or transverse lie position to a head position from RCTs in network meta-analysis
Figure 7 Funnel plot assessing the effects of using different uterine contraction inhibitors before ECV to move a breech or transverse lie position to a head position from RCTs in network meta-analysis
Figure 8 Funnel plot assessing the effects of ECV under different anesthesia methods to move a breech or transverse lie position to a head position from RCTs in network meta-analysis
[1] |
余艳红,陈叙. 助产学[M]. 北京:人民卫生出版社,2017:324-325.
|
[2] |
刘兴会,漆洪波. 难产[M]. 2版. 北京:人民卫生出版社,2021:372-377.
|
[3] |
郭颖婷,翟伟. 艾灸至阴穴矫正胎位不正的系统评价[J]. 实用妇科内分泌电子杂志,2019,6(17):134-135,137. DOI:10.16484/j.cnki.issn2095-8803.2019.17.101.
|
[4] |
|
[5] |
|
[6] |
|
[7] |
韩春彦,赵存,王兴蕾,等. 13种干预方案治疗脑卒中吞咽困难效果的网状Meta分析[J]. 护理研究,2020,34(11):1869-1877. DOI:10.12102/j.issn.1009-6493.2020.11.001.
|
[8] |
彭朝梨.臀位外倒转术对足月单胎臀位产妇外倒转成功率及妊娠结局的影响分析[J]. 世界最新医学信息文摘,2021,21(53):149-150. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1671-3141.2021.53.057.
|
[9] |
唐小媚,黎箐,杨金菊. 臀位外倒转术对足月单胎臀位产妇外倒转成功率及妊娠结局的影响[J]. 临床医学工程,2020,27(1):55-56. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1674-4659.2020.01.0055.
|
[10] |
林岸芸,于红静,武彦,等. 应用分娩球运动纠正胎儿臀先露及改善分娩结局[J]. 实用医学杂志,2020,36(3):406-409. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1006-5725.2020.03.026.
|
[11] |
廖琪,孙彦华. 艾灸至阴穴联合膝胸卧位矫正胎儿臀位的临床疗效观察[J]. 当代医学,2018,24(30):141-142.
|
[12] |
|
[13] |
|
[14] |
|
[15] |
|
[16] |
|
[17] |
|
[18] |
|
[19] |
|
[20] |
|
[21] |
|
[22] |
|
[23] |
|
[24] |
|
[25] |
|
[26] |
|
[27] |
|
[28] |
|
[29] |
|
[30] |
|
[31] |
|
[32] |
|
[33] |
|
[34] |
|
[35] |
|
[36] |
|
[37] |
|
[38] |
|
[39] |
|
[40] |
|
[41] |
|
[42] |
|
[43] |
|
[44] |
邓新琼,覃晓慧,廖滔,等. 臀位妊娠矫正方法的研究进展[J]. 广西医学,2017,39(8):1219-1221.
|
[45] |
|
[46] |
|
[47] |
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' Committee on Practice Bulletins——Obstetrics. Practice bulletin no. 161:external cephalic version[J]. Obstet Gynecol,2016,127(2):e54-61. DOI:10.1097/AOG.0000000000001312.
|
[48] |
|
[49] |
邓新琼,覃晓慧,廖滔,等. 足月单胎臀位外倒转术的可行性及影响因素分析[J]. 中国妇幼保健,2017,32(11):2476-2479. DOI:10.7620/zgfybj.j.issn.1001-4411.2017.11.72.
|
[50] |
李海冰,方昕,赵青松,等. 椎管内镇痛对孕妇臀位外倒转术的辅助疗效[J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版),2016,36(1):89-92. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1674-8115.2016.01.018.
|
[1] | QUAN Jialin, ZHU Lin, SU Yu, CHEN Zekai, CHEN Ziqi, ZHANG Zhuofan. Research on the Improvement Effect of Exercise Modes on the Executive Function of Overweight or Obese Children or Adolescents: a Network Meta-analysis [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2025, 28(27): 3422-3431. |
[2] | LI Hao, LI Jiangtao, LIU Dan, WANG Jianjun. Efficacy and Safety of Belimumab, Anifrolumab, and Telitacicept on the Treatment of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: a Network Meta-analysis [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2025, 28(23): 2924-2933. |
[3] | DU Qiongliang, LIN Bailang, GUO Honghua. Research Progress and Implications of Group Well-child Care [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2025, 28(21): 2672-2678. |
[4] | ZHU Shengjie, DIAO Huaqiong, HANG Xiaoyi, SUN Wenjun. Network Meta-analysis of Different Traditional Chinese Medicine Injections for the Treatment of Posterior Circulatory Ischemic Vertigo [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2025, 28(14): 1795-1808. |
[5] | CHI Xun, LIU Sisi, CHEN Qiao, HU Yue, WANG Weixian. The Suitability of Four Nutritional Screening Tools for Nutritional Screening in Patients with Cirrhosis: a Network Meta-analysis [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2025, 28(11): 1395-1402. |
[6] | GU Mingyu, QIN Tingting, QIAO Kun, BAI Xinyuan, WANG Yao, YANG Yutong, LI Xingming. A Network Meta-analysis of Primary Hypertension Management Patterns in China [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2025, 28(10): 1265-1272. |
[7] | GUO Jia, CAO Chunmei, LIU Guochun, ZHENG Man, ZHU Ruihan, LONG Wei. Effects of Different Exercise Types on Sleep in Insomnia Patients: a Network Meta-analysis [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2024, 27(35): 4376-4387. |
[8] | WANG Ting, WANG Haiyan, FU Wenjun. Effect of Chronic Atrophic Gastritis Treated with Different Acupuncture and Moxibustion Therapies: a Network Meta-analysis [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2024, 27(23): 2913-2920. |
[9] | HUANG Tengjia, CAO Xi, CHEN Lei, LI Ziying, QIN Lihua. The Effectiveness of Non-pharmacological Treatment for Post-stroke Shoulder-hand Syndrome: a Network Meta-analysis [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2024, 27(23): 2921-2930. |
[10] | TAN Shufa, ZHANG Leichang, GAO Qiangqiang, OU Yan, HUANG Shuilan. Efficacy and Safety of Biologics and Small Molecule Drugs in the Treatment of Ulcerative Colitis: a Network Meta-analysis [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2024, 27(17): 2155-2166. |
[11] | NIU Jingyuan, CHEN Huisheng, YU Jiaxiang, CUI Yu. Ligustrazine Injection in the Treatment of Acute Ischemic Stroke: a Bayesian Network Meta-analysis [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2024, 27(14): 1761-1774. |
[12] | XU Jun, QI Wenjie, WANG Chao, HU Lan, MIAO Bin. Analysis of Clinical Characteristics and Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes in Pregnancy Complicated with Acute Pancreatitis Patients of Different Etiologies [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2024, 27(11): 1343-1348. |
[13] | HE Jingyi, WANG Fang, SHUI Xiaoling, LI Ling, LIANG Qian. Efficacy of Non-pharmacological Interventions to Improve Perimenopausal Insomnia Symptoms: a Network Meta-analysis [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(31): 3963-3974. |
[14] | ZHU Lin, GUO Yankui, GAO Chen, CHEN Xuezhi, WANG Fashuai. Efficacy of Western Medicine, Chinese Patent Medicine and Their Combination on Post-stroke Insomnia: a Network Meta-analysis [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(30): 3823-3832. |
[15] | LI Lingling, HUANG Hailiang, YU Ying, JIA Yuqi, LIU Zhiyao, SHI Xin, WANG Fangqi, LIU Xinyue. Effect of Non-invasive Brain Stimulation on Autism Spectrum Disorder: a Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(11): 1389-1397. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||