Sanfu acupoint herbal patching for stable asthma: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Abstract

<div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="S1"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d4093943e156">Background</h5> <p id="P1"> <i>Sanfu</i> acupoint herbal patching (SAHP) is extensively used in people with stable asthma in China. However, the evidence available is scarce. This systematic review aims to evaluate the preventive and therapeutic effect and safety of SAHP in people with stable asthma. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="S2"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d4093943e164">Methods</h5> <p id="P2">We searched seven electronic databases for randomised controlled trials (RCTs). The Cochrane risk of bias tool was utilised to evaluate the methodological quality of the included studies and RevMan 5.3 and GRADEpro 3.6.1 were applied to perform data analyses. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="S3"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d4093943e169">Results</h5> <p id="P3">A total of 34 RCTs involving 3313 participants were included. The overall methodological quality of the trials was of high risk of bias. SAHP plus conventional therapy (CT) decreased the mean frequency (times per year) of asthma exacerbations compared with CT alone (MD: −1.42; 95% CI: −2.19 to −0.65; 7 RCTs), and similar effect was found for SAHP versus sham SAHP (MD: 0.42; 95%CI: 0.26–0.69; 1 RCT). For lung function (including PEF%, FEV ₁% and FEV ₁/FVC), SAHP plus CT showed better effect than CT alone, and so did SAHP versus sham SAHP on PEF and PEF%. Adverse effects in the SAHP groups were reported to be mild and well tolerated. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="S4"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d4093943e180">Conclusions</h5> <p id="P4">SAHP alone or combined with CT appears to be more effective than sham SAHP or CT on reduction of asthma exacerbations, improving lung function, and SAHP seems to be safe. However, the findings should be interpreted with caution due to limitations in trial quality. Further, rigorously designed, large-scale trials are warranted for robust evidence. </p> </div>