首页> 外文期刊>Evidence-Based Child Health: A Cochrane Review Journal >Cochrane review: Vitamin C for preventing and treating the common cold
【24h】

Cochrane review: Vitamin C for preventing and treating the common cold

机译:Cochrane评论:预防和治疗普通感冒的维生素C

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background nThe role of vitamin C (ascorbic acid) in the prevention and treatment of the common cold has been a subject of controversy for 60 years, but is widely sold and used as both a preventive and therapeutic agent. nnObjectives nTo discover whether oral doses of 0.2 g or more daily of vitamin C reduces the incidence, duration or severity of the common cold when used either as continuous prophylaxis or after the onset of symptoms. nnSearch strategy nWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 4, 2006); MEDLINE (1966 to December 2006); and EMBASE (1990 to December 2006). nnSelection criteria nPapers were excluded if a dose less than 0.2 g per day of vitamin C was used, or if there was no placebo comparison. nnData collection and analysis nTwo review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. 'Incidence' of colds during prophylaxis was assessed as the proportion of participants experiencing one or more colds during the study period. 'Duration' was the mean days of illness of cold episodes. nnMain results nThirty trial comparisons involving 11,350 study participants contributed to the meta-analysis on the relative risk (RR) of developing a cold whilst taking prophylactic vitamin C. The pooled RR was 0.96 (95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.92 to 1.00). A subgroup of six trials involving a total of 642 marathon runners, skiers, and soldiers on sub-arctic exercises reported a pooled RR of 0.50 (95% CI 0.38 to 0.66). nThirty comparisons involving 9676 respiratory episodes contributed to a meta-analysis on common cold duration during prophylaxis. A consistent benefit was observed, representing a reduction in cold duration of 8% (95% CI 3% to 13%) for adults and 13.6% (95% CI 5% to 22%) for children. nSeven trial comparisons involving 3294 respiratory episodes contributed to the meta-analysis of cold duration during therapy with vitamin C initiated after the onset of symptoms. No significant differences from placebo were seen. Four trial comparisons involving 2753 respiratory episodes contributed to the meta-analysis of cold severity during therapy and no significant differences from placebo were seen. nnAuthors' conclusions nThe failure of vitamin C supplementation to reduce the incidence of colds in the normal population indicates that routine mega-dose prophylaxis is not rationally justified for community use. But evidence suggests that it could be justified in people exposed to brief periods of severe physical exercise or cold environments. nnPlain language summary nVitamin C for preventing and treating the common cold nThe term 'the common cold' does not denote a precisely defined disease, yet the characteristics of this illness are familiar to most people. It is a major cause of visits to a doctor in Western countries and of absenteeism from work and school. It is usually caused by respiratory viruses for which antibiotics are useless. Other potential treatment options are of substantial public health interest. nSince vitamin C was isolated in the 1930s it has been proposed for respiratory infections, and became particularly popular in the 1970s for the common cold when (Nobel Prize winner) Linus Pauling drew conclusions from earlier placebo-controlled trials of large dose vitamin C on the incidence of colds. New trials were undertaken. nThis review is restricted to placebo-controlled trials testing at least 0.2 g per day of vitamin C. Thirty trials involving 11,350 participants suggest that regular ingestion of vitamin C has no effect on common cold incidence in the ordinary population. It reduced the duration and severity of common cold symptoms slightly, although the magnitude of the effect was so small its clinical usefulness is doubtful. Nevertheless, in six trials with participants exposed to short periods of extreme physical or cold stress or both (including marathon runners and skiers) vitamin C reduced the common cold risk by half. nTrials of high doses of vitamin C administered therapeutically (starting after the onset of symptoms), showed no consistent effect on either duration or severity of symptoms. However, there were only a few therapeutic trials and their quality was variable. One large trial reported equivocal benefit from an 8 g therapeutic dose at the onset of symptoms, and two trials using five-day supplementation reported benefit. More therapeutic trials are necessary to settle the question, especially in children who have not entered these trials.
机译:背景技术维生素C(抗坏血酸)在预防和治疗普通感冒中的作用一直是争论的主题,但是60年来它已被广泛销售并用作预防剂和治疗剂。 nn目标n当连续预防或在症状发作后,每天口服0.2 g或更多维生素C是否会降低普通感冒的发生率,持续时间或严重程度。 nn搜索策略n我们搜索了Cochrane对照试验中央注册簿(CENTRAL)(Cochrane图书馆,第4期,2006年); MEDLINE(1966年至2006年12月);和EMBASE(1990年至2006年12月)。 nn选择标准如果每天使用的维生素C剂量小于0.2 g,或者没有安慰剂比较,则排除nPapers。 nn数据收集和分析n两位评价作者独立提取数据并评估了试验质量。预防期间感冒的“发生率”被评估为研究期间经历一次或多次感冒的参与者的比例。 “持续时间”是感冒发作的平均日数。 nn主要结果n进行了30项试验比较,涉及11,350名研究参与者,对服用预防性维生素C时患感冒的相对风险(RR)进行了荟萃分析。汇总的RR为0.96(95%置信区间(CI)为0.92至1.00)。在总共642名马拉松运动员,滑雪者和士兵进行亚北极运动的六个试验中,有一个小组报告了RR为0.50(95%CI为0.38至0.66)。 n涉及9676例呼吸事件的30项比较有助于对预防期间的普通感冒持续时间进行荟萃分析。观察到持续的益处,代表成年人的感冒持续时间减少了8%(95%CI为3%至13%),儿童为13.6%(95%CI为5%至22%)。 n涉及3294例呼吸事件的七个试验比较有助于症状发作后开始的维生素C治疗期间感冒持续时间的荟萃分析。与安慰剂无明显差异。涉及2753个呼吸事件的四项试验比较有助于对治疗期间感冒严重程度的荟萃分析,与安慰剂无明显差异。 nn作者的结论n补充维生素C未能减少正常人群中感冒的发生率表明,常规的大剂量预防措施不能合理地用于社区。但是有证据表明,在短暂的剧烈运动或寒冷环境中暴露的人可能是有道理的。普通语言摘要预防和治疗普通感冒的维生素C术语“普通感冒”并不表示确切定义的疾病,但是这种疾病的特征对于大多数人来说都很熟悉。这是西方国家看医生以及工作和学校缺勤的主要原因。它通常是由呼吸道病毒引起的,而抗生素对此无用。其他潜在的治疗选择具有重大的公共卫生意义。 n自从1930年代分离出维生素C以来,就已经提出将其用于呼吸道感染,并在1970年代因感冒而特别流行,当时(诺贝尔奖获得者)莱纳斯·鲍林(Linus Pauling)从较早的安慰剂对照试验中得出了大剂量维生素C的结论。感冒的发生率。进行了新的试验。 n该评论仅限于安慰剂对照试验,每天至少测试0.2 g维生素C。三十项涉及11,350名参与者的试验表明,定期摄入维生素C对普通人群的普通感冒发病率没有影响。尽管影响的程度很小,但它可以稍微降低普通感冒症状的持续时间和严重程度,其临床实用性值得怀疑。然而,在六项试验中,参与者短期遭受了极度的身体或寒冷压力或两者(包括马拉松运动员和滑雪者)的极端应激,维生素C将普通感冒风险降低了一半。 n通过治疗(症状发作后开始)进行大剂量维生素C的试验,对症状的持续时间或严重程度均未显示出一致的影响。但是,仅有少数治疗试验,其质量参差不齐。一项大型试验报告称,症状发作时使用8 g治疗剂量可产生模棱两可的益处,而使用五天补充剂的两项试验则报告有益处。要解决这个问题,还需要进行更多的治疗性试验,尤其是对于尚未参加这些试验的儿童。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号