Objective To evaluate the therapeutic effect, safty and tolerance of Gankeshuangqing Capsule in the treatment of patients suffering from wind-heat syndrome (acute upper respiratory infection or acute bronchitis). Methods The clinical trials were designed multicentered, double blind, double dummy, randomized and parallel positive drug controlled. A total of 289 patients participated in the trials. Those who suffered from acute upper respiratory infection were given throat virus-detection to make a definite diagnosis of the origins of disease. Results Among the 40 patients who were diagnosed with virus infection, 81.82% in Gankeshuangqing group were healed, but only 50.00% in control group, and significant differences were observed between the two groups (Plt;0.05). At the end of the third day of treatment, the rates of cure and excellence in patients suffering from acute upper respiratory infection were 80.00% in Gankeshuangqing group, and 68.57% in control group, and both groups showed good therapeutic effect，but there was no significant difference between the two groups (Pgt;0.05). At the end of the seventh day of treatment, the rates of cure and excellence in patients suffering from acute bronchitis were 82.35% in Gankeshuangqing group, and 63.77% in control group, and both groups showed good therapeutic effect, and there were significant differences between the two groups (Plt;0.05)；only one patient in Gankeshuangqing group had constipation during the treatment, but there was no evidence showing that it is caused by Gankeshuangqing. Conclusion The results show that Gankeshuangqing Capsule has a definite effect on wind-heat syndrome (acute upper respiratory infection or acute bronchitis) with good safety.
Objective To evaluate and select essential medicine for acute bronchitis using evidence-based methods based on the burden of disease. Methods By means of the approaches, criteria, and workflow set up in the second article of this series, we referred to the recommendations of evidence-based or authority guidelines from inside and outside China, collected relevant evidence from domestic clinical studies, and recommended essential medicine based on evidence-based evaluation. Data were analyzed by Review Manager (RevMan) 5.1 and GRADE profiler 3.6 to evaluate quality of evidence. Results (1) Eight guidelines were included (seven foreign guidelines, one domestic guideline; five based on evidence, three based on expert consensus). (2) A result of six RCTs (n=816, low quality) indicated that pentoxyverine had efficiencies of 53% to 82% for cough relief. Among the six RCTs, a result of three RCTs (n=283) indicated that pentoxyverine was slightly less efficient than procaterol (RR=0.86, 95%CI 0.78 to 0.94, P=0.001); a result of two RCTs (n=233) indicated that pentoxyverine was slightly less efficient than Chinese medicinals decoction (RR=0.82, 95%CI 0.74 to 0.91, Plt;0.001). Adverse reaction of pentoxyverine (incidence: 0% to 2.4%) mainly covered nausea, palpitation, etc. Pentoxyverine cost 0.20 yuan (for adult) or 0.08 yuan (for child) daily, which was orally taken and applicable to the target population. (3) A result of six RCTs (n=403, low quality) indicated that the efficiencies of dextromethorphan for cough relief was 47.0% to 95.3%. Among the six RCTs, a result of one RCT (n=283) indicated that dextromethorphan hydrobromide (nasal drop) was more efficient than blank intervention (RR=3.71, 95%CI 1.91 to 7.21); a result of one RCT (n=43) indicated that dextromethorphan (for oral use) was more efficient than placebo (RR=1.74, 95%CI 1.13 to 2.66); a result of one RCT (n=300, moderate quality) indicated that dextromethorphan was more efficient than pentoxyverine (RR=1.16, 95%CI 1.07 to 1.26); a result of one observational study (n=121, low quality) indicated that dextromethorphan given for 5 days had an efficiency of 66.5%. Adverse reaction of dextromethorphan (incidence: 2% to 30%) mainly covered mouth dryness, dizziness, nausea, etc. Conclusion (1) We offer a b recommendation for dextromethorphan used in relieving dry cough due to acute bronchitis. (2) We offer a weak recommendation for pentoxyverine as symptomatic treatment for cough relief. (3) We make a recommendation against antibiotics, β2-agonist bronchodilators and mucolytic agents as routine use. (4) More large-scale, multi-center, double-blinded RCTs are needed in clinical and pharmacoeconomic studies of acute bronchitis in hopes of producing high-quality local evidence.