Meta analysis of rock salt aerosol therapy for respiratory tract diseases.
10.3760/cma.j.cn121094-20210719-00345
- Author:
Na CAO
1
;
Li Jun PENG
1
;
Wen DU
1
Author Information
1. West China School of Public Health and West China Fourth Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Meta-analysis as topic;
Respiratory tract diseases;
Rock salt aerosol;
Speleotherapy
- MeSH:
Humans;
Respiratory Aerosols and Droplets;
Forced Expiratory Volume;
Vital Capacity;
Respiratory Tract Diseases
- From:
Chinese Journal of Industrial Hygiene and Occupational Diseases
2022;40(10):751-756
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective: To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of rock salt aerosol in the treatment of respiratory tract diseases. Methods: In June 2021, the clinical randomized controlled trial literatures of rock salt aerosol therapy for respiratory tract diseases were searched from CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, Cochrane Library, PubMed database and EMBASE database. Cochrane risk bias evaluation tool was used to evaluate risk bias, Revman 5.4 and Stata16 were used to conduct meta-analysis, TSA 0.9 was used to conduct sequential analysis of trials, and gradepro was used to evaluate evidence quality. Results: A total of 21 literatures were included. According to whether the subjects received rock salt aerosol therapy, they were divided into the experimental group (1125 people) and the control group (973 people) . Compared with the control group, the total clinical effective rate (RR=1.22, 95%CI: 1.15~1.29, P<0.001) , forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV(1)) (WMD=0.20, 95%CI: 0.09~0.31, P<0.001) , percentage of FEV(1) in the predicted value (FEV(1)%) (WMD=5.06, 95%CI: 3.47~6.65, P<0.001) , forced vital capacity (FVC) (WMD=0.22, 95% CI: 0.16~0.27, P<0.001) , maximum expiratory flow (PEF) (WMD=21.312, 95%CI: 9.189~33.435, P=0.004) of experimental group were higher. TSA test shows that the difference conclusions of total effective rate, FEV(1), FEV(1)%, FVC and PEF were reliable, but the conclusion of FEV(1)% needs to be treated with caution; Three literatures reported the adverse reactions in the experimental group; GRADE evidence quality evaluation showed 3 very low-quality evidences and 2 low-quality evidences. Conclusion: Rock salt aerosol therapy combined with conventional therapy has a certain effect on the treatment of respiratory tract diseases, which needs to be further confirmed by high-quality evidence.
