饮用天然矿泉水对功能性消化不良、胃食管反流病或其他原因引起的胃灼热有多大效果?临床干预研究的系统回顾。

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE
Arun D'Souza, K. Zink, Jost Langhorst, Manfred Wildner, C. Stupp, Thomas Keil
{"title":"饮用天然矿泉水对功能性消化不良、胃食管反流病或其他原因引起的胃灼热有多大效果?临床干预研究的系统回顾。","authors":"Arun D'Souza, K. Zink, Jost Langhorst, Manfred Wildner, C. Stupp, Thomas Keil","doi":"10.37766/inplasy2024.1.0007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background For centuries, spring and other natural waters have been recommended as external or internal remedies for numerous diseases. For studies that examined the effects of drinking mineral waters against heartburn, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), or functional dyspepsia a systematic review is lacking. Objectives The main aim of this systematic review was to examine the effects of drinking natural mineral waters on heartburn from various causes by identifying all published intervention studies and critically appraising their methods as well as summarizing their results. Methods We systematically searched the largest medical literature database MEDLINE, further relevant web sources and gray literature for randomized and non-randomized trials, with or without control groups, up to September 2021 and no language restrictions. Further inclusion criteria were adult patients with heartburn, drinking cure with natural mineral water as intervention, compared to no or other interventions (care-as-usual, waiting list). We defined the reduction of heartburn symptoms and duration of disease episodes as primary and quality of life as secondary outcomes. Two reviewers independently carried out the study quality assessments (risk of bias) using the National Institutes of Health-Study Quality Assessment Tools. Results Nine trials comprising 393 patients from Italy, Russia, Ukraine, and Germany fulfilled all inclusion criteria. We identified three randomized controlled trials (all with poor methodological quality), plus six before-after (pre/post) intervention studies without a control group. The intervention groups of the three comparative trials seemed to show a stronger reduction of self-reported heartburn symptoms, and duration of heartburn episodes than the respective control groups, however they all had a poor methodological quality. Conclusion Based on the best available evidence of clinical studies, we cannot recommend or advise against drinking natural mineral waters as a treatment for heartburn. The potential benefits of natural mineral waters that were reported in some studies with a lower evidence level (e.g., lacking a control group) should be verified by good quality randomized clinical trials with adequate comparison groups and longer follow-up periods. .","PeriodicalId":10541,"journal":{"name":"Complementary Medicine Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How effective is drinking natural mineral water against heartburn from functional dyspepsia, gastroesophageal reflux disease or other causes? A systematic review of clinical intervention studies.\",\"authors\":\"Arun D'Souza, K. Zink, Jost Langhorst, Manfred Wildner, C. Stupp, Thomas Keil\",\"doi\":\"10.37766/inplasy2024.1.0007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background For centuries, spring and other natural waters have been recommended as external or internal remedies for numerous diseases. For studies that examined the effects of drinking mineral waters against heartburn, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), or functional dyspepsia a systematic review is lacking. Objectives The main aim of this systematic review was to examine the effects of drinking natural mineral waters on heartburn from various causes by identifying all published intervention studies and critically appraising their methods as well as summarizing their results. Methods We systematically searched the largest medical literature database MEDLINE, further relevant web sources and gray literature for randomized and non-randomized trials, with or without control groups, up to September 2021 and no language restrictions. Further inclusion criteria were adult patients with heartburn, drinking cure with natural mineral water as intervention, compared to no or other interventions (care-as-usual, waiting list). We defined the reduction of heartburn symptoms and duration of disease episodes as primary and quality of life as secondary outcomes. Two reviewers independently carried out the study quality assessments (risk of bias) using the National Institutes of Health-Study Quality Assessment Tools. Results Nine trials comprising 393 patients from Italy, Russia, Ukraine, and Germany fulfilled all inclusion criteria. We identified three randomized controlled trials (all with poor methodological quality), plus six before-after (pre/post) intervention studies without a control group. The intervention groups of the three comparative trials seemed to show a stronger reduction of self-reported heartburn symptoms, and duration of heartburn episodes than the respective control groups, however they all had a poor methodological quality. Conclusion Based on the best available evidence of clinical studies, we cannot recommend or advise against drinking natural mineral waters as a treatment for heartburn. The potential benefits of natural mineral waters that were reported in some studies with a lower evidence level (e.g., lacking a control group) should be verified by good quality randomized clinical trials with adequate comparison groups and longer follow-up periods. .\",\"PeriodicalId\":10541,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Complementary Medicine Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Complementary Medicine Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.37766/inplasy2024.1.0007\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Complementary Medicine Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37766/inplasy2024.1.0007","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景几个世纪以来,人们一直建议将矿泉水和其他天然水作为治疗多种疾病的外用或内服疗法。关于饮用矿泉水对胃灼热、胃食管反流病(GERD)或功能性消化不良的影响,目前还缺乏系统性综述。目的 本系统综述的主要目的是通过识别所有已发表的干预研究,对其方法进行批判性评估并总结其结果,从而研究饮用天然矿泉水对各种原因引起的胃灼热的影响。方法 我们系统地检索了最大的医学文献数据库 MEDLINE、其他相关网络资源和灰色文献,以查找截至 2021 年 9 月的随机和非随机试验,无论是否有对照组,且无语言限制。进一步的纳入标准是患有胃灼热的成年患者,以饮用天然矿泉水作为干预措施,与不采取或其他干预措施(照常护理、等待名单)进行比较。我们将减少胃灼热症状和疾病发作持续时间定义为主要结果,将生活质量定义为次要结果。两名评审员使用美国国立卫生研究院的研究质量评估工具独立进行了研究质量评估(偏倚风险)。结果 来自意大利、俄罗斯、乌克兰和德国的九项试验(包括 393 名患者)符合所有纳入标准。我们确定了三项随机对照试验(方法质量均较差),以及六项无对照组的前后(前/后)干预研究。与对照组相比,三项比较试验的干预组似乎更能减轻自我报告的胃灼热症状,缩短胃灼热发作的持续时间,但它们的方法质量都很差。结论 根据现有的最佳临床研究证据,我们不能建议或反对饮用天然矿泉水来治疗胃灼热。一些证据水平较低的研究(如缺乏对照组)中报告的天然矿泉水的潜在益处,应通过质量良好的随机临床试验进行验证,这些试验应具有充分的对比组和较长的随访期。.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How effective is drinking natural mineral water against heartburn from functional dyspepsia, gastroesophageal reflux disease or other causes? A systematic review of clinical intervention studies.
Background For centuries, spring and other natural waters have been recommended as external or internal remedies for numerous diseases. For studies that examined the effects of drinking mineral waters against heartburn, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), or functional dyspepsia a systematic review is lacking. Objectives The main aim of this systematic review was to examine the effects of drinking natural mineral waters on heartburn from various causes by identifying all published intervention studies and critically appraising their methods as well as summarizing their results. Methods We systematically searched the largest medical literature database MEDLINE, further relevant web sources and gray literature for randomized and non-randomized trials, with or without control groups, up to September 2021 and no language restrictions. Further inclusion criteria were adult patients with heartburn, drinking cure with natural mineral water as intervention, compared to no or other interventions (care-as-usual, waiting list). We defined the reduction of heartburn symptoms and duration of disease episodes as primary and quality of life as secondary outcomes. Two reviewers independently carried out the study quality assessments (risk of bias) using the National Institutes of Health-Study Quality Assessment Tools. Results Nine trials comprising 393 patients from Italy, Russia, Ukraine, and Germany fulfilled all inclusion criteria. We identified three randomized controlled trials (all with poor methodological quality), plus six before-after (pre/post) intervention studies without a control group. The intervention groups of the three comparative trials seemed to show a stronger reduction of self-reported heartburn symptoms, and duration of heartburn episodes than the respective control groups, however they all had a poor methodological quality. Conclusion Based on the best available evidence of clinical studies, we cannot recommend or advise against drinking natural mineral waters as a treatment for heartburn. The potential benefits of natural mineral waters that were reported in some studies with a lower evidence level (e.g., lacking a control group) should be verified by good quality randomized clinical trials with adequate comparison groups and longer follow-up periods. .
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Complementary Medicine Research
Complementary Medicine Research Medicine-Complementary and Alternative Medicine
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
5.60%
发文量
50
期刊介绍: Aims and Scope ''Complementary Medicine Research'' is an international journal that aims to bridge the gap between conventional medicine and complementary/alternative medicine (CAM) on a sound scientific basis, promoting their mutual integration. Accordingly, experts of both conventional medicine and CAM medicine cooperate on the journal‘s editorial board, which accepts papers only after a rigorous peer-review process in order to maintain a high standard of scientific quality. Spectrum of ''Complementary Medicine Research'': - Review and Original Articles, Case Reports and Essays regarding complementary practice and methods - Journal Club: Analysis and discussion of internationally published articles in complementary medicine - Editorials of leading experts in complementary medicine - Questions of complementary patient-centered care - Education in complementary medicine - Reports on important meetings and conferences - Society Bulletins of Schweizerische Medizinische Gesellschaft für Phytotherapie (SMGP) and Deutsche Gesellschaft für Naturheilkunde Bibliographic Details Complementary Medicine Research Journal Abbreviation: Complement Med Res ISSN: 2504-2092 (Print) e-ISSN: 2504-2106 (Online) DOI: 10.1159/issn.2504-2092 www.karger.com/CMR
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信