Objectives To systematically review the efficacy and safety of bonesetting combined acupuncture in the treatment of cervical vertigo. Methods PubMed, CNKI, VIP, CBM and WanFang Data databases were searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on bonesetting combined acupuncture in the treatment of cervical vertigo from inception to February 15th, 2017. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. Meta-analysis was performed by RevMan 5.3 software. Results Eighteenth RCTs involving 1 915 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that, compared with acupuncture or bonesetting alone group, the effective rate in bonesetting combining acupuncture group was higher (RRacupuncture=1.17, 95%CI 1.12 to 1.23, P<0.000 01; RRbonesetting=1.16, 95%CI 1.10 to 1.23, P<0.000 01). Improvement of the cervical vertigo symptom and function in the combined group was better than that in the acupuncture group or bonesetting group (MDacupuncture=3.42, 95%CI 2.29 to 4.56, P<0.000 01; MDbonesetting=6.45, 95%CI 5.56 to 7.33, P<0.000 01). Average flow velocity of cervical vertigo basilar artery (BA) in the combined group was superior to the bonesetting group (MD=7.54, 95%CIP=0.02). 1.08 to 13.99, Conclusions Bonesetting combining acupuncture treatment of cervical vertigo in terms of effectiveness and function improvement are better than those of acupuncture alone or pure bonesetting. Due to the limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high-quality studies are required to verify above conclusions.
ObjectiveTo overview the reporting and methodology quality of systematic reviews/meta-analysis on acupuncture in the treatment of primary osteoporosis (POP).MethodsPubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CBM, WanFang Data, CNKI and VIP databases were electronically searched to collect systematic reviews/meta-analysis on acupuncture in the treatment of POP from inception to July 2018. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and assessed the quality of systematic reviews. A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) methodological quality score and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) were used to assess the methodological quality and reporting quality of the systematic reviews, along with the risk of homogeneity and publication bias.ResultsA total of 11 systematic reviews/meta-analysis were included and multiple evaluations of the radar plot showed that the quality average rank scored 7.68. The major problems in studies were lack of items registration, imperfect search strategies and selection bias and so on.ConclusionThe quality of systematic reviews/meta-analysis of acupuncture in the treatment of POP is insufficient, indicating that the methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews should be further strengthened.