Summary of findings 2. Other prokinetics compared to domperidone 10mg three times a day for functional dyspepsia.
| Other prokinetics compared to domperidone 10mg three times a day for functional dyspepsia | ||||||
| Patient or population: functional dyspepsia Setting: out‐patient clinic Intervention: other prokinetics Comparison: domperidone 10mg three times per day | ||||||
| Outcomes | Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | № of participants (studies) | Certainty of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments | |
| Risk with domperidone 10mg three times a day | Risk with Other prokinetics | |||||
|
Not symptom‐free or no symptoms improvement (itopride 50 three times per day, cinitapride 1 mg three times per day, mosapride 5 mg three times per day versus domperidone 10 mg three times per day) Follow‐up: 2 to 4 weeks |
Study population | RR 0.94 (0.83 to 1.07) | 1527 (7 RCTs) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ VERY LOW1 2 | ||
| 42 per 100 | 39 per 100 (35 to 45) | |||||
|
Post‐treatment scores Follow‐up: 2 to 4 weeks |
The mean post‐treatment scores was 1.0 to 5.4 (different scales were used) | SMD 0.19 lower (0.35 lower to 0.03 lower) | ‐ | 617 (3 RCTs) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ VERY LOW1 3 | Higher scores means worse symptoms |
|
Mean difference symptoms scores Follow‐up: 2 to 4 weeks |
The mean difference symptoms scores was ‐0.35 to ‐13 (different scales were used) | SMD 0.13 lower (0.31 lower to 0.05 higher) | ‐ | 839 (4 RCTs) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ VERY LOW1 2 | Positive scores means worse symptoms |
|
Adverse events Follow‐up: 2 to 4 weeks |
Study population | RR 0.69 (0.50 to 0.97) | 1557 (7 RCTs) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ VERY LOW1 4 5 | ||
| 10 per 100 | 7 per 100 (5 to 9) | |||||
| *The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio; OR: Odds ratio. | ||||||
| GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High certainty: We are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect Moderate certainty: We are moderately confident in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different Low certainty: Our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: The true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect Very low certainty: We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect | ||||||
1 Downgraded one level due to study limitation (most information (> 60%) were obtained from studies with unclear risk of bias for random sequence generation and/or allocation).
2 Downgraded two levels due to imprecision (95% CI of pooled data included no effect and small number of included studies).
3 Downgraded two levels due to imprecision (95% CI of pooled data was very close to no effect and small number of included studies).
4 Downgraded one level due to imprecision (there were fewer than 300 events and wide 95% CI).
5 Downgraded one level due to imprecision (95% CI of pooled data was very close to no effect)