Abstract

Overall, 6 databases were used to conduct a comprehensive literature search from inception to January 22, 2022. The corrected covered area (CCA) was used to analyze the overlapping between SRs. Meta-analysis was conducted when that of the included SRs was inappropriate. A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR-2) was also employed to assess the quality of the included SRs. In total, 12 SRs were identified, which included 12 unique primary studies. The included SRs ranged in quality from moderate to critically low and had an extremely high CCA (36.4%). Compared to conventional treatment, LHQW+WM showed efficacy concerning fatigue recovery [risk ratio (RR) = 1.69, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.04-2.73, n = 2, I2 = 0%], cough recovery (RR = 1.65, 95% CI: 1.09-2.51, n = 3, I2 = 39.1%), and overall effective rates (RR = 1.17, 95% CI: 1.07-1.28, n = 3, I2 = 17.5%). LHQW+WM may improve the clinical symptoms of patients with COVID-19; however, the results should be interpreted cautiously because of the rigorous processes in the included SRs. http://links.lww.com/AHM/A32.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call