Comparing the effects of different non-pharmacological traditional Chinese medicine therapies on cancer survivors: A Bayesian Network Meta-analysis

IF 3.3 3区医学 Q1 INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE

Complementary therapies in medicine Pub Date : 2025-03-27 DOI:10.1016/j.ctim.2025.103164

Shaowang Zhang , Yuanyin Li , Zhide Liang , Jiaxing Dai , Hong Huang , Huanghui Zhang , Bing Yang , Jinghui Wang , Dongxin Tang

{"title":"Comparing the effects of different non-pharmacological traditional Chinese medicine therapies on cancer survivors: A Bayesian Network Meta-analysis","authors":"Shaowang Zhang , Yuanyin Li , Zhide Liang , Jiaxing Dai , Hong Huang , Huanghui Zhang , Bing Yang , Jinghui Wang , Dongxin Tang","doi":"10.1016/j.ctim.2025.103164","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>Several studies have demonstrated the positive impact of non-pharmacological Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) therapies on pain, fatigue, sleep quality, and quality of life in cancer survivors. However, no research has compared the effectiveness of these therapies. This study aims to compare various interventions and identify the most effective non-pharmacological TCM therapies to provide evidence-based recommendations for cancer survivors.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, and Wanfang Data. RCTs investigating the effects of Taichi, Qigong, acupuncture, acupressure, TCM emotional therapy, and mixed therapies as interventions for cancer survivors were screened was conducted. Data from the creation of the database to February 2025 were included. Two independent reviewers evaluated the study quality. A Bayesian Network Meta-analysis was conducted to carry out a random effects model.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Seventy-one RCTs involving 6473 patients were included in the analysis. Network meta-analysis showed significance for all five intervention therapies in pain control in cancer patients. The best efficacy was observed for acupressure (SMD=-1.1 [-1.55, −0.66]) and Taichi/Qigong (SMD=-1.08[-1.64, −0.53]), followed by TCM emotional therapy (SMD=-0.93 [-1.42, −0.44]) and acupuncture (SMD=-0.54 [-0.93, −0.15]), with the latter showing comparatively lower efficacy. None of the interventions demonstrated superior efficacy in improving fatigue compared to the control group. Mixed therapies (SMD=-1.36[-2.56, −0.28]) demonstrated the greatest effect in improving sleep quality. Taichi/Qigong (SMD=1.87 [0.96, 2.83]) demonstrated certain advantages in improving quality of life. However, acupuncture and TCM emotional therapy had no significant effect on sleep quality or overall quality of life.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The evidence from this study suggests that acupressure and Taichi/Qigong are recommended as the most effective therapies for pain relief and quality of life improvement, respectively. The efficacy of these therapies for fatigue remains inconclusive. However, due to the limited number of included studies and the high risk of bias, these results should be interpreted with caution. Future studies should include more rigorously designed high-quality randomized controlled trials to confirm their long-term efficacy and safety.</div></div><div><h3>Registration</h3><div>PROSPERO CRD42024601976</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10545,"journal":{"name":"Complementary therapies in medicine","volume":"90 ","pages":"Article 103164"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Complementary therapies in medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965229925000391","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

Several studies have demonstrated the positive impact of non-pharmacological Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) therapies on pain, fatigue, sleep quality, and quality of life in cancer survivors. However, no research has compared the effectiveness of these therapies. This study aims to compare various interventions and identify the most effective non-pharmacological TCM therapies to provide evidence-based recommendations for cancer survivors.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, and Wanfang Data. RCTs investigating the effects of Taichi, Qigong, acupuncture, acupressure, TCM emotional therapy, and mixed therapies as interventions for cancer survivors were screened was conducted. Data from the creation of the database to February 2025 were included. Two independent reviewers evaluated the study quality. A Bayesian Network Meta-analysis was conducted to carry out a random effects model.

Results

Seventy-one RCTs involving 6473 patients were included in the analysis. Network meta-analysis showed significance for all five intervention therapies in pain control in cancer patients. The best efficacy was observed for acupressure (SMD=-1.1 [-1.55, −0.66]) and Taichi/Qigong (SMD=-1.08[-1.64, −0.53]), followed by TCM emotional therapy (SMD=-0.93 [-1.42, −0.44]) and acupuncture (SMD=-0.54 [-0.93, −0.15]), with the latter showing comparatively lower efficacy. None of the interventions demonstrated superior efficacy in improving fatigue compared to the control group. Mixed therapies (SMD=-1.36[-2.56, −0.28]) demonstrated the greatest effect in improving sleep quality. Taichi/Qigong (SMD=1.87 [0.96, 2.83]) demonstrated certain advantages in improving quality of life. However, acupuncture and TCM emotional therapy had no significant effect on sleep quality or overall quality of life.

Conclusion

The evidence from this study suggests that acupressure and Taichi/Qigong are recommended as the most effective therapies for pain relief and quality of life improvement, respectively. The efficacy of these therapies for fatigue remains inconclusive. However, due to the limited number of included studies and the high risk of bias, these results should be interpreted with caution. Future studies should include more rigorously designed high-quality randomized controlled trials to confirm their long-term efficacy and safety.

Registration

PROSPERO CRD42024601976

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Complementary therapies in medicine 医学-全科医学与补充医学

CiteScore

8.60

自引率

2.80%

发文量

101

审稿时长

112 days

期刊介绍： Complementary Therapies in Medicine is an international, peer-reviewed journal that has considerable appeal to anyone who seeks objective and critical information on complementary therapies or who wishes to deepen their understanding of these approaches. It will be of particular interest to healthcare practitioners including family practitioners, complementary therapists, nurses, and physiotherapists; to academics including social scientists and CAM researchers; to healthcare managers; and to patients. Complementary Therapies in Medicine aims to publish valid, relevant and rigorous research and serious discussion articles with the main purpose of improving healthcare.