Search

Background: Scapulohumeral periarthritis is a disease with high incidence and great pain. The current western treatments with many side effects, poor efficacy cannot fundamentally solve the problem. Complementary and alternative therapies have played an excellent role in the treatment of scapulohumeral periarthritis. However, it is not clear which complementary and alternative therapy is more effective. Therefore, we propose a protocol to compare the efficacy and safety of various complementary and alternative therapies through network meta-analysis (NMA) to provide choice guidance for the therapy. Methods: A comprehensive search will be conducted for randomized controlled trials of complementary and alternative therapy for scapulohumeral periarthritis as well as ongoing trials. The time limit is from the establishment of the database until January 2021. Literature and data extraction were completed independently by two researchers. Through pairwise comparison and meta-analysis of Bayesian NMA, all the evidences are evaluated comprehensively. STATA16.0 and WinBUGS1.4.3 software will be used for data processing and analysis, and recommendation evaluation will be used to develop and assess grades to classify the quality of NMA evidence. Results: Through the analysis, we will obtain the ranking of the efficacy and safety of different complementary and alternative therapies in the treatment of scapulohumeral periarthritis, in order to provide reference for clinical selection of treatment methods. Conclusion: Complementary and alternative therapies of scapulohumeral periarthritis plays a positive role in improving the symptoms of scapulohumeral periarthritis. This study can provide evidence support for clinicians and patients. International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols registration number: INPLASY202140044.

Background: Tension-type headache (TTH) is the most common form of primary headache with high prevalence, which affects the quantity of life seriously. The pharmacological treatment of TTH is not the most effective. Meanwhile, complementary therapies and alternative therapies play an essential role in the treatment of TTH, and there is an absence of comparison between various interventions. Therefore, we propose the network meta-analysis protocol to compare the efficacy and safety of various complementary therapies and alternative therapies for TTH. Methods: From the beginning to February 2021, we will search the database to collect randomized controlled trials of complementary and alternative therapies for TTH. Two researchers will be responsible for screening retrieve documents, extracting data. The risk of bias will be assessed based on the Cochrane bias risk tool. We will use STATA16.0 and WinBUGS1.4.3 for paired meta-analysis and Bayesian network meta-analysis. The quality of evidence will be assessed using the grading of recommendations assessment development and evaluation. Results: This study will compare and rank the efficacy and safety of various complementary and alternative treatments for TTH. Conclusions: This study will provide more extensive evidence for the complementary and alternative therapies of TTH. We expect to assist clinicians and patients in choosing the optimum treatment. Protocol registration number: INPLASY202130088.