- 著者
- Shin Takayama Tetsuhiro Yoshino Sayaka Koizumi Yasuhito Irie Tomoko Suzuki Susumu Fujii Rie Katori Mosaburo Kainuma Seiichi Kobayashi Tatsuya Nogami Kenichi Yokota Mayuko Yamazaki Satoko Minakawa Shigeki Chiba Norio Suda Yoshinobu Nakada Tatsuya Ishige Hirofumi Maehara Yutaka Tanaka Mahiko Nagase Akihiko Kashio Kazuhisa Komatsu Makoto Nojiri Osamu Shimooki Kayo Nakamoto Ryutaro Arita Rie Ono Natsumi Saito Akiko Kikuchi Minoru Ohsawa Hajime Nakae Tadamichi Mitsuma Masaru Mimura Tadashi Ishii Kotaro Nochioka Shih-Wei Chiu Takuhiro Yamaguchi Takao Namiki Akito Hisanaga Kazuo Mitani Takashi Ito
- 出版者
- The Japanese Society of Internal Medicine
- 雑誌
- Internal Medicine (ISSN:09182918)
- 巻号頁・発行日
- pp.0027-22, (Released:2022-11-02)
- 参考文献数
- 41
- 被引用文献数
- 3
Objective Patients in whom coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was suspected or confirmed between January 1, 2020, and October 31, 2021, were enrolled from Japanese hospitals in this multicenter, retrospective, observational study. Methods Data on the treatment administered (including conventional and Kampo medicine) and changes in common cold-like symptoms (such as fever, cough, sputum, dyspnea, fatigue, and diarrhea) were collected from their medical records. The primary outcome was the number of days without a fever (with a body temperature <37 °C). The secondary outcomes were symptomatic relief and the worsening of illness, defined as the presence of a condition requiring oxygen inhalation. The outcomes of patients treated with and without Kampo medicine were compared. Patients We enrolled 962 patients, among whom 528 received conventional and Kampo treatment (Kampo group) and 434 received conventional treatment (non-Kampo group). Results Overall, after adjusting for the staging of COVID-19 and risk factors, there were no significant between-group differences in the symptoms or number of days being afebrile. After performing propensity score matching and restricting the included cases to those with confirmed COVID-19 who did not receive steroid administration and initiated treatment within 4 days from the onset, the risk of illness worsening was significantly lower in the Kampo group than in the non-Kampo group (odds ratio=0.113, 95% confidence interval: 0.014-0.928, p=0.0424). Conclusion Early Kampo treatment may suppress illness worsening risk in COVID-19 cases without steroid use. Further randomized controlled studies are needed to confirm the clinical benefit of Kampo medicine for COVID-19.
- 著者
- Kentaro Iwata Wataru Igarashi Midori Honjo Takashi Nishimoto Kyoko Shinya Akiko Makino Kazuo Mitani Yoshiko Tatsumi Hiroyuki Ninomiya Kumi Higasa Seiichiro Usuki Hiroki Kagawa Daisuke Uchida Kohei Takimoto Rei Suganaga Hiroo Matsuo Yuichiro Oba Mami Horigome Hideaki Oka Goh Ohji Yasuhisa Abe Hiroyuki Yoshida Shohiro Kinoshita Midori Hirai
- 出版者
- 日本プライマリ・ケア連合学会
- 雑誌
- General Medicine (ISSN:13460072)
- 巻号頁・発行日
- vol.14, no.1, pp.13-22, 2013 (Released:2013-07-05)
- 参考文献数
- 34
- 被引用文献数
- 3
Background: Gingyo-gedoku-san (GGGS) is an herbal medicine approved for upper respiratory infections in Japan. We conducted an open-label, multi-center, prospective trial, comparing GGGS with oseltamivir in patients with influenza and influenza-like illness (ILI) as a pilot study.Methods: Subjects were healthy persons aged between 16 and 40, and were enrolled from January 12, 2010 to March 24, 2011. Fifteen patients were enrolled in this trial (8 and 7 for GGGS and oseltamivir, respectively). RT-PCR was positive for pandemic influenza A (H1N1) in 10 patients. The patients were provided with either GGGS or oseltamivir for 5 days. The primary outcome was mortality and/or hospitalization 7 days after the initial diagnosis. Body temperature and other clinical characteristics were also evaluated.Results: All patients recovered from illness without complication or hospitalization. The mean time to resolve symptoms for the GGGS and oseltamivir groups was 3.9 days and 3.3 days, respectively (p=0.43). The GGGS group appeared to have a smaller symptom score AUC than the oseltamivir group, (p=0.26). Time to recover activity level appeared to be shorter in the GGGS group (p=0.10), with shorter time to recover health status (p=0.02). Sub-group analysis on patients with positive PCR showed similar results between the two groups.Conclusion: GGGS was associated with symptom improvements resembling oseltamivir for both influenza and ILI. Randomized controlled trials involving larger sample sizes are needed to confirm these results.