%0 Journal Article
%T 太极拳习练过程中安全性的meta分析<br>Safety of Tai Chi: Meta-analysis
%A 崔华
%A 李俊峰
%A 阎彬
%A 李艳君
%A 李翠含
%A 刘宁宁
%J 北京体育大学学报
%D 2018
%R 10.19582/j.cnki.11-3785/g8.2018.06.017
%X 摘要：太极拳风靡海内外,但是近年来有报告对其安全性提出了质疑。分析已发表的随机对照试验文献，证实太极拳安全性。检索MEDLINE/PubMed,EBSCO host和the Cochrane Library从建库到2016年2月的文献。纳入标准：1）随机对照试验；2）两组平行；3）太极拳是核心干预；4）详细报告不良反应。使用Cochrane偏倚风险评价表评估纳入文献质量。研究结果：最终24项研究（26篇文献；2003-2016年；共1794受试者）符合纳入标准。12项研究报告了完整的随机序列生成和分配隐藏。太极拳与运动或非运动干预相比，严重、一般、干预引发的不良反应均无显著差异。与非运动干预相比，包含不良反应监测预案的研究与未提及的研究在一般不良反应发生数量上有显著差异(RD=0.05，95%CI：0.00,0.10；P= 0.05)。对于心脏病人来说，太极拳干预与非运动干预相比严重不良反应发生数量存在显著差异(RD=-0.11,95% CI:-0.20, -0.03;P= 0.01)。研究结论：在随机对照实验中，太极拳干预与其他运动或非运动干预相比是安全的，特别是适合心脏病人练习。希望今后的研究采用更严谨的研究方法，纳入足够的样本量，报告高质量的不良反应数据，这样才能更好地总结归纳评价太极拳的安全性。<br>Abstract: Tai Chi has been popular at home and abroad, but in recent years there have been doubts about its safety. This study analyzed the published papers with randomized controlled trials in order to explore the safety of Tai Chi. The literatures until February 2016 was searched in databases of Medline/PubMed, EBSCO host and the Cochrane Library. Inclusion criteria of studies: 1) randomized controlled trials; 2) had experiment group and control group; 3) Tai Chi was the core intervention way; 4) reported the adverse events. The quality of studies was evaluated. Results: The 24 studies (26 papers published in 2003-2016, 1794 subjects in total) were included in this study. Twelve study reported complete random sequence generation and allocation concealment. Compared with active or inactive exercise intervention, there was no significant difference in the frequency of intervention-related non-serious and serious adverse events. There was a significant difference in the incidence of general adverse reactions between the studies mentioned adverse event monitoring plan and the studied without adverse event monitoring plan report (RD = 0.05, 95%CI: 0.00, 0.10; P = 0.05). For cardiac patients, there were significant differences in the number of serious adverse events between Tai Chi intervention and non exercise intervention (RD =－0.11,95% CI:－0.20,－0.03; P = 0.01). Conclusions: In randomized controlled trials, Tai Chi intervention is safe when compared with other exercise or non exercise interventions, and it is especially suitable for patients with heart disease. It is hoped that more rigorous research methods should be used in future research to include sufficient sample size and report high quality data of adverse events so as to better summarize and evaluate the safety of Tai Chi
%K adverse events meta-analysis safety tai chi randomized controlled trials
%U http://xuebao.bsu.edu.cn/ch/reader/view_abstract.aspx?file_no=20180617&flag=1