資源描述：
《針刺治療腦卒中后尿失禁療效的系統(tǒng)評價(jià)》由會(huì)員上傳分享，免費(fèi)在線閱讀，更多相關(guān)內(nèi)容在行業(yè)資料-天天文庫。
1、針灸臨床雜志2010年第26卷第01期·39·文獻(xiàn)研究3針刺治療腦卒中后尿失禁療效的系統(tǒng)評價(jià)12△111王再嶺,傅立新,熊俊,祁營洲,李勝(11天津中醫(yī)藥大學(xué),天津300193;21天津中醫(yī)藥大學(xué)第一附屬醫(yī)院,天津300193)摘要:目的:評價(jià)國內(nèi)針刺治療腦卒中后尿失禁的療效。方法:計(jì)算機(jī)檢索CNKI、VIP、萬方數(shù)據(jù)庫、CBM,手工檢索天津中醫(yī)藥大學(xué)圖書館過刊資料庫及相關(guān)會(huì)議論文集,收集國內(nèi)針刺治療腦卒中后尿失禁的臨床隨機(jī)對照試驗(yàn),由兩名評價(jià)者獨(dú)立提取資料并進(jìn)行方法學(xué)質(zhì)量評估。統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)分析采用RevMan412110軟件,并進(jìn)行失安全數(shù)分析;用漏斗圖分析發(fā)表性偏倚。結(jié)
2、果:共納入11個(gè)隨機(jī)對照試驗(yàn)(共1053例)。Meta分析結(jié)果顯示,有效率:電針與非針刺(RR=2110,95%CI[1179,2145])、毫針與非針刺(RR=1129,95%CI[1119,1,40]),針刺組優(yōu)于對照組。失安全數(shù)分析顯示評價(jià)結(jié)果較為穩(wěn)定;漏斗圖圖形不對稱,考慮存在發(fā)表性偏倚。結(jié)論:針刺在治療腦卒中后尿失禁方面具有較好的效果,但尚需要更多高質(zhì)量的隨機(jī)雙盲對照試驗(yàn)來進(jìn)一步證實(shí)針刺治療腦卒中后尿失禁的療效。關(guān)鍵詞:針刺;腦卒中;尿失禁;隨機(jī)對照試驗(yàn);系統(tǒng)評價(jià)中圖分類號:R264.2文獻(xiàn)標(biāo)識碼:A文章編號:1005-0779(2010)01-0039-0
3、5SystematicReviewofTherapeuticEffectonAcupunctureforTreatmentofUrinaryIncontinenceafterStroke12111WANGZai-ling,FULi-xin,XIONGJun,QIYing-zhou,LISheng(1.TianjinUniversityofChineseMedicine,Tianjin300193,China;2.FirstHospitalAffiliatedtoTianjinUniversityofChineseMedicine,Tianjin300193,China
4、)Abstract:Objective:Toevaluatethetherapeuticeffectofacupunctureintreatmentofurinaryincontinenceaf2terstrokeinChina.Methods:Randomizedcontrolledtrials(RCTs)involvingacupunctureversusothermethodsinthetreatmentofurinaryincontinenceinChinawereidentifiedfromCNKI,VIP,WANFANGDatabaseandCBM.Wea
5、lsohandsearchedrelevantjournalsandconferenceproceedings.Datawereextractedandevaluatedbytworeviewersindependentlywithaspeciallydesignedextractionform.TheCochraneCollaboration’sRev2Man4.2.10softwarewasusedfordataanalyses.Atthesametime,wedoFail-safenumberanalysisanduseFunnelplotforthepossi
6、bleexistenceofpublicationbias.Results:Atotalof11trialsinvolving1053patientswereincluded.Meta-analysesshowedthatthetotaleffectiverateinthetreatmentgroupwasbetterthancontrolgroup:electrical-acupuncturegroupversusthegroupwithoutacupuncture(RR=2.10,95%CI[1.79,2.45]);acupuncturegroupversusth
7、egroupwithoutacupuncture(RR=1.29,95%CI[1.19,1,40].Fail-safenumberanalysisrevealedarelativelystableresult.Funnelplotisasymmetrical,whichshowedthepossibleexist2enceofpublicationbias.Conclusion:Acupunctureisbetterthanothertreatments,butfurtherlarge-scaletri2alsarerequiredtodefinet
