Table 4.
Impact on other secondary outcome measures: findings from analyses not amenable to meta‐analysis
| 3M3F | LHQW | QFPD | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Study ID (sample size) | Hu 2020 (n = 284) | Xiao 2020 (n = 188) | Yu 2020 (n = 295) | Li 2020 (n = 60) | Xin 2020 (n = 63) |
| Proportion of patients whose chest CT improved after 7 days | TG vs. CG: 83.8% vs. 64.1%, mean difference: 19.7%, 95%CI: 9.6%‐29.4% | TG: 1 (1–2), CG: 1 (1‐2) (p = 0.482) | |||
| White cell count (10̂9/L): pre‐treatment to post‐treatment | TG: 5.1 ± 0.4 to 5.9 ± 0.4, CG: 5.2 ± 0.4 to 5.5 ± 0.4, p < 0.05 | ||||
| Lymphocytes (10̂9/L): pre‐treatment to post‐treatment | TG: 1.5 ± 0.1 to 1.7 ± 0.2, CG: 1.5 ± 0.1 to 1.6 ± 0.2, p < 0.05 | ||||
| C‐reactive protein (mg/L): pre‐treatment to post‐treatment |
TG: 26 ± 6 to 22 ± 4 CG: 27 ± 6 to 24 ± 4 p < 0.05 |
||||
| Procalcitonin (ng/L): pre‐treatment to post‐treatment |
TG: 0.089 ± 0.025 to 0.058 ± 0.008, CG: 0.094 ± 0.022 to 0.094 ± 0.022 p < 0.05 |
||||
| Length of stay | TG: 13.6 ± 0.4 days, CG: 16.4 ± 0.3 days, p < 0.05 | TG: 19.0 (15.3‐22.0) days, CG: 17.0 (15.0‐19.3) days, p = 0.165 | |||
| Conversion rate of SAR‐CoV‐2 viral assay | TG vs. CG: 76.8% vs. 71.1%, mean difference: 5.6%, 95%CI: −4.6%‐ 15.7%, p = 0.279 | ||||
| Viral assay conversion time (median) | TG vs. CG: 11.0 vs .12.0 days, HR: 1.21, 95%CI: 0.92‐1.59 | ||||
| Medications used | Antiviral medication use: TG: 58 (100%); TG COMB: 61 (100%); CG: 63 (100%). Antibiotic use: TG: 30 (51.7%); TG COMB: 25 (41%); CG: 62 (98.4%) | Antibiotic use: p = 0.269; Corticosteroid use TG: 7 (18.9%), CG: 5 (19.2%) (p = .390); Antiviral drugs Interferon: TG: 34 (91.9%), CG: 26 (100%%), p = .140; Arbidol: TG: 24 (64.9%), CG: 16 (61.5%), p = 0.997; Lopanivir TG: 29 (78.4%), CG: 25 (96.2%), p = 0.049) | |||
Note: Apart from one study (Hu et al., 2020) evaluated LHQW capsule, all the rest investigated the granule preparation of LHQW.
Abbreviation: HR, hazard ratio.