The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Chinese Herbal Medicine (“3 medicines and 3 formulations”) for COVID-19: rapid systematic review and meta-analysis

Chinese Herbal Medicine (“3 medicines and 3 formulations”) for COVID-19: rapid systematic review and meta-analysis
Chinese Herbal Medicine (“3 medicines and 3 formulations”) for COVID-19: rapid systematic review and meta-analysis
Background: to evaluate the evidence behind claims that Chinese Herbal Medicine, specifically “three medicines and three formulations” (3M3F, comprising Jinhua Qinggan, Lianhua Qingwen, Xuebijing, Qingfei Paidu, Huashi Baidu and Xuanfei Baidu), is an effective treatment for COVID-19.

Methods: we searched PubMed, MEDLINE and CNKI databases, preprint servers, clinical trial registries and supplementary sources for Chinese- or English-language randomised trials or non-randomised studies with comparator groups, which tested the constituents of 3M3F in the treatment of COVID-19 up to September 2020. Primary outcome was change in disease severity. Secondary outcomes included various symptoms. Meta-analysis (using generic inverse variance random effects model) was performed when there were two or more studies reporting on the same symptom.

Results: of 607 articles identified, thirteen primary studies (six RCTs and seven retrospective non-randomised comparative studies) with 1467 participants met our final inclusion criteria. Studies were small and had significant methodological limitations, most notably potential bias in assessment of outcomes. No study convincingly demonstrated a statistically significant impact on change in disease severity. Eight studies reported sufficiently similar secondary outcomes to be included in a meta-analysis. Some statistically significant impacts on symptoms, chest CT manifestations, laboratory variables and length of stay were demonstrated, but such findings were sparse and many remain unreplicated.

Conclusions: these findings neither support nor refute the claim that 3M3F alters the severity of COVID-19 or alleviates symptoms. More rigorous studies are required to properly ascertain the potential role of Chinese Herbal Medicine in COVID-19.

Systematic review registration: this review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020187502) prior to data collection and analysis.
Hu, Xiao-Yang
Wang, Yangzihan
06b180c9-8f73-490b-baa3-ef47683b6fa5
Chen, Junqiao
a123af2e-f0eb-4746-b3d5-a24883b5d80d
Greenhalgh, Trisha
bdd27a5d-1fdb-453b-9c12-28241cf5dcdc
Wardle, Jon
2f8a9b5e-4f1b-4046-90d0-352f9d928023
Hu, Xiao-Yang
Wang, Yangzihan
06b180c9-8f73-490b-baa3-ef47683b6fa5
Chen, Junqiao
a123af2e-f0eb-4746-b3d5-a24883b5d80d
Greenhalgh, Trisha
bdd27a5d-1fdb-453b-9c12-28241cf5dcdc
Wardle, Jon
2f8a9b5e-4f1b-4046-90d0-352f9d928023

[Unknown type: UNSPECIFIED]

Record type: UNSPECIFIED

Abstract

Background: to evaluate the evidence behind claims that Chinese Herbal Medicine, specifically “three medicines and three formulations” (3M3F, comprising Jinhua Qinggan, Lianhua Qingwen, Xuebijing, Qingfei Paidu, Huashi Baidu and Xuanfei Baidu), is an effective treatment for COVID-19.

Methods: we searched PubMed, MEDLINE and CNKI databases, preprint servers, clinical trial registries and supplementary sources for Chinese- or English-language randomised trials or non-randomised studies with comparator groups, which tested the constituents of 3M3F in the treatment of COVID-19 up to September 2020. Primary outcome was change in disease severity. Secondary outcomes included various symptoms. Meta-analysis (using generic inverse variance random effects model) was performed when there were two or more studies reporting on the same symptom.

Results: of 607 articles identified, thirteen primary studies (six RCTs and seven retrospective non-randomised comparative studies) with 1467 participants met our final inclusion criteria. Studies were small and had significant methodological limitations, most notably potential bias in assessment of outcomes. No study convincingly demonstrated a statistically significant impact on change in disease severity. Eight studies reported sufficiently similar secondary outcomes to be included in a meta-analysis. Some statistically significant impacts on symptoms, chest CT manifestations, laboratory variables and length of stay were demonstrated, but such findings were sparse and many remain unreplicated.

Conclusions: these findings neither support nor refute the claim that 3M3F alters the severity of COVID-19 or alleviates symptoms. More rigorous studies are required to properly ascertain the potential role of Chinese Herbal Medicine in COVID-19.

Systematic review registration: this review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020187502) prior to data collection and analysis.

Text
7985c8b1-ad65-4d1e-8430-2ba7a47ca3d0 - Author's Original
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (1MB)

More information

Published date: 17 February 2021

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 491399
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/491399
PURE UUID: 2d6838a0-267b-4cb3-bd1d-013e10f5b8be

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 21 Jun 2024 16:41
Last modified: 21 Jun 2024 16:47

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Xiao-Yang Hu
Author: Yangzihan Wang
Author: Junqiao Chen
Author: Trisha Greenhalgh
Author: Jon Wardle

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×