[Outcome indicators in randomized controlled trials of traditional Chinese medicine treatment of post-stroke depression].

Abstract

This study systematically reviewed the randomized controlled trial(RCT) of traditional Chinese medicine(TCM) treatment of post-stroke depression(PSD) and analyzed the clinical study characteristics and outcome indicators, aiming to optimize the design and establish the core outcome set in the future clinical trials of the TCM treatment of PSD. PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EMbase, CNKI, VIP, Wanfang, and SinoMed were searched for the relevant RCT published in recent 3 years. The basic characteristics, intervention measures, and outcome indicators of the included RCT were extracted, and the descriptive analysis was carried out. A total of 76 RCTs were eventually included, with the sample size concentrated in 80-100 cases. The most frequent TCM syndromes were liver depression and Qi stagnation(15 times, 31.91%) and phlegm combined with stasis(5 times, 10.63%). The frequency of intervention methods followed a descending trend of TCM decoction(35 times, 46.05%) and TCM decoction + acupuncture(4 times, 5.26%), Chinese patent medicine(3 times, 3.94%), and the intervention mainly lasted for 1 to 3 months(43 times, 60.56%). The adverse reactions of patients were mainly digestive system reaction(150 patients, 39.37%) and nervous system reaction(112 patients, 29.39%). Most of the included studies had unclear risk of bias, involving 84 outcome indicators, which belonged to 8 indicator domains. The RCTs of TCM treatment of PSD showed a variety of problems, such as non-standard TCM syndrome differentiation, inconsistent names of TCM syndrome scores and measurement tools, low quality, unclear risk of bias, neglect of endpoint indicators, unreasonable selection of substitute indicators, lack of differentiation between primary and secondary outcome indicators, non-standard reporting of safety indicators, insufficient attention to economic indicators, and lack of long-term prognosis evaluation. It is suggested that the future research should improve the quality of methodology and build a standardized core outcome set to promote the development of high-quality clinical research in this field.