Skip to main content

Table 3 Summary of findings of CAM for childhood atopic eczema in randomized controlled trials

From: Complementary and alternative medicine for treatment of atopic eczema in children under 14 years old: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Study ID

Sample size

Main intervention

Estimate effect [95% CI]

Outcome

P

CAM vs usual care

 Liu CH 2009 [20]

T:150 C:148

Swimming therapy

RR 1.01 [0.92, 1.11]

RR 1.01 [0.96, 1.07]

RR 0.38 [0.28, 0.52]

Clinical effectiveness rate

50% Improvement of symptoms and signs

Relapse rate

P = 0.8318

P = 0.5671

P < 0.00001

 Liu WQ 2016 [21]

T:60 C:60

Fasting and Rotation diet

RR 1.57 [1.04, 2.38]

RR 1.32 [1.09, 1.60]

RR 0.36 [0.12, 1.08]

Clinical effectiveness

50% Improvement of symptoms and signs;

Relapse rate

P = 0.0323

P = 0.0049

P = 0.0681

 Wu YQ 2014 [22]

T:74 C:74

Velvetfeeling lotion (external application)

RR 1.92 [1.36, 2.72]

RR 1.33 [1.10, 1.61]

Clinical effectiveness rate

50% Improvement of symptoms and signs

P = 0.0002

P = 0.0031

CAM + usual care vs usual care

 Chen DX 2015 [23]

T:20 C:20

Bifid Triple Viable capsules (oral)

RR 1.63 [0.87, 3.04]

RR 1.73 [1.15, 2.60]

Clinical effectiveness rate

50% Improvement of symptoms and signs

P = 0.1283

P = 0.0088

 Chen YL 2015 [24]

T:58 C:58

Probiotics (oral)

RR 1.21 [0.87, 1.68]

RR 1.19 [0.99, 1.42]

RR 0.31 [0.16, 0.60]

Clinical effectiveness rate

50% Improvement of symptoms and signs

Relapse rate

P = 0.2659

P = 0.0624

P = 0.0004

 Guo YH 2015 [25]

T:90 C:90

Tetralogy of viable bifidobacterium tablets (oral)

RR 1.37 [1.01, 1.85]

RR 1.27 [1.04, 1.55]

RR 0.39 [0.27, 0.56]

Clinical effectiveness rate

50% Improvement of symptoms and signs

Relapse rate

P = 0.0400

P = 0.0172

P < 0.00001

 Jiang YX 2013 [26]

T:65 C:60

Velvetfeeling lotion (external application)

RR 1.85 [0.90, 3.79]

RR 1.91 [1.46, 2.50]

Clinical effectiveness rate

50% Improvement of symptoms and signs

P = 0.0947

P < 0.00001

 Li DY 2012 [27]

T:32 C:30

Bifid Triple Viable capsules (oral)

RR 1.36 [1.03, 1.79]

RR 1.32 [1.06, 1.65]

RR 0.28 [0.13, 0.60]

Clinical effectiveness rate

50% Improvement of symptoms and signs;

Relapse rate

P = 0.0295

P = 0.0151

P = 0.0011

 Mao HX 2013 [28]

T:50 C:50

Probiotics (oral)

RR 0.17 [0.04, 0.71]

Relapse rate

P = 0.0151

 Wei MX 2010 [29]

T:38 C:36

Viable Bacillus Coagulans tablets (oral)

RR 1.33 [1.05, 1.68]

RR 1.30 [1.07, 1.58]

RR 0.28 [0.14, 0.56]

Clinical effectiveness rate

50% Improvement of symptoms and signs;

Relapse rate

P = 0.0189

P = 0.0089

P = 0.0004

 Ye CQ 2017 [30]

T:48 C:48

Condensation living bacterium bacillus (oral)

RR 1.57 [1.21, 2.02]

RR 1.31 [1.10, 1.55]

RR 0.21 [0.10, 0.47]

Clinical effectiveness rate

50% Improvement of symptoms and signs;

Relapse rate

P = 0.0005

P = 0.0019

P = 0.0001

 Zhang MH 2013 [31]

T:35 C:35

Bifico Lriple Viable (oral)

RR 1.15 [0.91, 1.46]

RR 0.38 [0.17, 0.85]

50% Improvement of symptoms and signs;

Relapse rate

P = 0.2371

P = 0.0180

 Zhang XN 2013 [32]

T:36 C:34

Velvetfeeling lotion (external application)

RR 6.61 [1.62, 26.96]

RR 1.25 [1.00, 1.56]

Clinical effectiveness rate

50% Improvement of symptoms and signs

P = 0.0084

P = 0.0542

CAM vs placebo

 Reza 2011 [35]

T:19 C:21

Synbiotic (oral)

MD 19.10 [7.60, 30.60]

Clinical effectiveness scores

P = 0.0017

 Sergei V. Gerasimov 2010 [37]

T:48 C:48

Probiotics (oral)

MD 6.40 [2.71, 10.09]

Clinical effectiveness scores

P = 0.0009

 Wu YJ 2017 [39]

T:33 C:33

Probiotics (Lactobacillus rhamnosus) (oral)

MD 10.85 [3.82, 17.88]

Clinical effectiveness scores

P = 0.0035

 Yavuz 2012 [40]

T:20 C:20

Probiotic (oral)

MD 10.20 [7.45, 12.95]

Clinical effectiveness scores

P < 0.00001

 Youngshin 2012 [41]

T:58 C:60

Probiotics (L. plantarum CJLP133) (oral)

MD 7.30 [2.63, 11.97]

Clinical effectiveness scores

P = 0.0029

  1. CAM complementary and alternative medicine, RR risk ratio, MD mean difference, CI confidence interval