| Literature DB >> 26180532 |
Wing-Fai Yeung1, Ka-Fai Chung2, Ka-Yan Ng2, Yee-Man Yu2, Shi-Ping Zhang3, Bacon Fung-Leung Ng4, Eric Tat-Chi Ziea4.
Abstract
Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) treatments are often prescribed based on individuals' pattern diagnoses. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials in Chinese and English literatures on TCM pattern-based treatment for depression has therefore been conducted. A total of 61 studies, 2504 subjects, and 27 TCM patterns were included. Due to the large variation of TCM pattern among participants, we only analyzed the top four commonly studied TCM patterns: liver qi depression, liver depression and spleen deficiency, dual deficiency of the heart, and spleen and liver depression and qi stagnation. We found that Xiaoyao decoction was the most frequently used herbal formula for the treatment of liver qi depression and liver depression with spleen deficiency, while Chaihu Shugan decoction was often used for liver depression and qi stagnation. Bai Shao (Paeonia lactiflora Pall.) and Chai Hu (Bupleurum chinense DC.) were commonly used across different TCM patterns regardless of the prescribed Chinese herbal formulas. The rationale underlying herb selection was seldom provided. Due to the limited number of studies on TCM pattern-based treatment of depression and their low methodological quality, we are unable to draw any conclusion regarding which herbal formulas have higher efficacy and which TCM patterns respond better to CHM.Entities:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26180532 PMCID: PMC4477207 DOI: 10.1155/2015/160189
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Figure 1Study selection flowchart.
The most common TCM patterns diagnosed in people with depression.
| TCM pattern | Chinese name | Number of subjects diagnosed with the TCM pattern (%) (total | Number of studies that examined the TCM pattern (%) (total |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| 797 (45.2%) | 19 (45.2%) |
|
|
| 425 (24.1%) | 13 (31.0%) |
|
| 心 | 315 (17.9%) | 9 (21.4%) |
|
|
| 225 (12.8%) | 8 (19.0%) |
aSix studies examined more than one TCM pattern.
The commonly used Chinese herbal medicine for depression in subjects diagnosed with different TCM patterns.
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of studies that examined the TCM pattern |
|
|
|
|
| Commonly used Chinese herbal formula | Xiaoyao decoction | Xiaoyao decoction | Guipi decoction (2, 22.2%); | Chaihu Shugan decoction |
| Number of studies that provided the composition of herbal formula |
|
|
|
|
| Number of studies that provided TCM treatment principle |
|
|
|
|
| Composition of herbal formula (% of studies that provided the formula's composition)a | ||||
| Bai He [ | 11.8% | / | / | / |
| Bai Shao [ | 70.6% | 100% | 50.0% | 100% |
| Ban Xia [ | 17.6% | 11.1% | 37.5% | 16.7% |
| Bai Zhu [ | 52.9% | 55.6% | 25.0% | 16.7% |
| Bei Mu [ | / | / | 25.0% | / |
| Bing Pian [ | / | / | 12.5% | / |
| Bo He [ | 29.4% | 33.3% | / | / |
| Bo Zi Ren [ | / | / | 50.0% | / |
| Chan Su [ | / | / | 12.5% | / |
| Chai Hu [ | 94.1% | 77.8% | 50.0% | 83.3% |
| Cao Bai Zhu [ | 5.6% | 22.2% | / | / |
| Chen Pi [ | 17.6% | 33.3% | 25.0% | 33.3% |
| Chuan Xiong [ | 17.6% | 22.2% | 25.0% | 83.3% |
| Chi Wu Jia Pi [ | / | / | 12.5% | / |
| Dang Gui [ | 64.7% | 55.6% | 12.5% | 16.7% |
| Dan Pi [ | 29.4% | 11.1% | / | 16.7% |
| Dan Shen [ | 11.8% | 11.1% | 25.0% | / |
| Da Zao [ | 11.8% | / | 50.0% | / |
| Fu Ling [ | 58.8% | 88.9% | 50.0% | 33.3% |
| Fo Shou [ | / | 22.2% | 37.5% | / |
| Gan Cao [ | 29.4% | 22.2% | 62.5% | 33.3% |
| Gan Cao (Honey-toasted) [ | 35.3% | 33.3% | 25.0% | 16.7% |
| Gui Yuan [ | / | / | 37.5% | / |
| Gui Zhi [ | / | / | 12.5% | / |
| He Huan Hua [ | 5.9% | / | / | 16.7% |
| He Huan Pi [ | 29.4% | 22.2% | 37.5% | 50.0% |
| Huang Lian [ | / | / | 12.5% | / |
| Huang Qin [ | 5.9% | 11.1% | 12.5% | / |
| Huang Qi (Honey-toasted) [ | / | / | 12.5% | / |
| Jiang [ | 23.5% | / | 25.0% | / |
| Mai Dong [ | 5.9% | / | 12.5% | / |
| Mu Xiang [ | / | 22.2% | 12.5% | / |
| Niu Huang [Bos taurus domesticus Gmelin.] | / | / | 12.5% | / |
| Qing Pi [ | / | 11.1% | 25.0% | 33.3% |
| Ren Shen [ | / | / | 12.5% | / |
| Rou Gui [ | / | / | 12.5% | / |
| She Xiang [ | / | / | 12.5% | / |
| Di Huang [ | / | 11.1% | 12.5% | / |
| Shi Chang Pu [ | 41.2% | 11.1% | / | / |
| Su He Xiang [ | / | / | 12.5% | / |
| Tai Zi Shen [ | / | 11.1% | 12.5% | / |
| Xiang Fu [ | 23.5% | 44.4% | / | 83.3% |
| Xiao Mai [ | 5.9% | / | 25.0% | / |
| Ye Jiao Teng [ | 5.9% | / | / | 16.7% |
| Yu Jin [ | 41.2% | 11.1% | 50.0% | 100% |
| Yuan Zhi [ | 23.5% | / | 37.5% | 16.7% |
| Zao Ren [ | 35.3% | 11.1% | 25.0% | 16.7% |
| Zhi Ke [ | 35.3% | 66.7% | / | 83.3% |
| Zhi Zi [ | 41.2% | 11.1% | / | 16.7% |
aIndividual herbs used in at least 10% of the studies on a particular TCM pattern were listed.
Effective rate and Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) score of pattern-based Chinese herbal medicine treatment for depression.
| Chinese herbal formula | Type of cases | Mean effective rate in % (range, 95% CI) | Mean HAMD change score (range, 95% CI) |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Xiaoyao decoction/pill ( | Depression ( | 84.7 (70.0–93.3, 80.8–84.7) | 19.1 (12.8–26.0, 18.4–19.9) |
| Chaihu Shugan decoction ( | Depression ( | 90.0 (86.7–93.3, 88.8–91.2) | 15.0 (14.6–15.4, 14.9–15.1) |
| Jieyu Heji ( | Depression ( | 51.0 (NA) | NR |
| Yushu pill ( | Depression ( | 74.3 (NA) | NR |
| All ( | 85.1 (51.0–93.3, 77.3–80.9) | 17.7 (12.8–26.0, 17.2–18.63) | |
|
| |||
| Xiaoyao decoction/pill ( | Depression comorbid diabetes ( | NR | 7.3 (NA) |
| Yiqiyangyin Shuganjieyu decoction ( | Depression comorbid diabetes ( | 83.3 (NA) | 12.1 (NA) |
| Chaihu Shugan decoction ( | Depression ( | 92.1 (NA) | NR |
| All ( | 87.7 (83.3–92.1, 86.2–89.2) | 9.7 (7.3–12.1, 8.9–10.5) | |
|
| |||
| Guipi decoction ( | Depression ( | NR | NR |
| Xiaochaihu Tang ( | Depression ( | NR | NR |
| Anshen Jieyu Fang decoction ( | Depression comorbid diabetes ( | NR | 10.7 (NA) |
| Jieyu Yi Hao ( | Depression ( | 90.0 (NA) | 11.4 (NA) |
| Shexiang Baoxin pill ( | Depression ( | 92.2 (NA) | NR |
| All ( | 91.5 (90.0–92.2, 91.3–91.6) | 10.8 (10.7–11.4, 10.6–11.0) | |
|
| |||
| Chaihu Shugan decoction ( | Depression ( | 89.8 (86.7–93.0, 88.8–90.9) | 17.3 (13.9–20.7, 16.2–18.4) |
| Shujiele Wutang pill ( | Depression ( | 91.4 (NA) | 18 (NA) |
| All ( | 90.4 (86.7–93.0, 89.7–91.0) | 17.5 (13.9–20.7, 16.9–18.2) | |
| All studies ( | 85.0 (51.0–93.33, 84.1–85.9) | 15.4 (7.3–26.0, 15.0–15.8) |
aOne study studied more than one TCM pattern; NA: not applicable; NR: not reported.
Effective rate and Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) score of combined pattern-based Chinese herbal medicine treatment and antidepressants for depression.
| Chinese herbal formula | Type of cases | Mean effective rate in % (range, SD, 95% CI) | Mean HAMD change score (range, 95% CI) |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Xiaoyao decoction/pill ( | Depression ( | 86.0 (70.0–94.3, 85.1–87.0) | 19.1 (11.4–23.2, 18.4–19.9) |
| Banxia Houpu decoction ( | Depression ( | 97.2 (NA) | 16.0 (NA) |
| Kaiyu Quhuo decoction ( | Depression ( | 100 (NA) | NR |
| All ( | 88.3 (70.0–100.0, 87.4–89.2) | 17.8 (11.4–23.2, 17.5–18.2) | |
|
| |||
| Xiaoyao decoction/pill ( | Depression ( | 86.0 (66.7–95.1, 84.6–87.4) | 21.5 (20.4–23.0, 21.3–21.7) |
| Self-invented formula ( | Depression ( | 91.7 (NA) | NR |
| Kuaiwei Shugan pill ( | Depression ( | NR | 12.2 (NA) |
| All ( | 86.8 (66.7–95.1, 85.6–88.0) | 20.1 (12.2–23.0, 19.6–20.5) | |
|
| |||
| Guipi decoction ( | Depression comorbid diabetes ( | 92.1 (NA) | NR |
| Ningcao Wangyou decoction ( | Depression ( | 53.8 (NA)a | 16.8 (NA)a |
| Ganmai Dazao decoction plus Suanzaoren decoction ( | Poststroke depression ( | 100.0 (NA) | 6.0 (NA) |
| All ( | 77.0 (53.8–100.0, 68.7–85.2) | 11.4 (6.0–16.8, 9.5–13.3) | |
|
| |||
| Chaihu Shugan decoction ( | Depression ( | 80.0 (NA)a | 15.0 (8.9–21.1, 12.8–17.1) |
| Xiaoyao decoction/pill ( | Depression ( | NR | NR |
| All ( | 80.0 (NA) | 15.0 (8.9–21.1, 12.8–17.1) | |
| All studies ( | 86.3 (53.8–100.0, 85.5–87.2) | 17.7 (6.0–22.6, 17.4–18.0) |
aOnly one study presented the data; bfive studies studied more than one TCM pattern; NA: not applicable; NR: not reported.