| Title |
Efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal medicine for chronic prostatitis associated with damp-heat and blood-stasis syndromes: a meta-analysis and literature review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s108699 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zhiqiang Wang, Lei Yuan, Yongchuan Wang, Baizhi Yang, Xiaohong Dong, Zhaowang Gao |
| Abstract |
The aim of this meta-analysis and systematic review is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) for chronic prostatitis (CP) associated with damp-heat and blood-stasis syndromes. An electronic search of 13 databases up to May 2016 was screened to identify randomized controlled trials comparing the safety and efficacy of CHM for the treatment of CP associated with damp-heat and blood-stasis syndromes. Studies reporting on effective rates, adverse events, National Institutes of Health chronic prostatitis symptom index (NIH-CPSI) scores, and symptom index of Chinese medicine for chronic prostatitis (SI-CM) scores as outcomes were included in the analysis. Data were analyzed by fixed- or random-effect models using the Review Manager software. Thirteen articles with the modified Jadad score ≥4 were identified. It was found that CHM was superior to placebo in increasing the efficacy (odds ratio: 6.72, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.78-9.48, P<0.00001) and reducing the SI-CM scores (standardized mean difference: -1.08, 95% CI: -1.35 to -0.81, P<0.00001). Oral CHMs were significantly more effective than placebo at reducing NIH-CPSI scores, with a mean difference of -1.39 (95% CI: -1.87 to -0.92, P<0.00001). Nevertheless, no significant differences were found between Prostant and placebo (standardized mean difference: -0.23, 95% CI: -0.46 to 0.01, P=0.06). The frequency of adverse events associated with oral CHM was similar to that associated with placebo (risk ratio: 1.36, 95% CI: 0.72-2.55, P=0.34) and less than that associated with Prostant (risk ratio: 1.63, 95% CI: 1.14-2.34, P=0.008). Our novel analysis demonstrates that CHM ranks highest in terms of improvement of CP associated with damp-heat and blood-stasis syndromes. While Prostant showed some efficacy in this disorder, it was associated with a smaller reduction in NIH-CPSI scores. In conclusion, CHM monotherapy is safe and effective for the treatment of CP associated with damp-heat and blood-stasis syndromes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 67% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 17 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 12% |
| Other | 2 | 12% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 6% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 24% |
| Unknown | 6 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 29% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 12% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 6 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 September 2016.
All research outputs
#13,479,192
of 22,889,074 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#698
of 1,606 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,393
of 337,404 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#44
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,889,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,606 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 337,404 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.