Background. As a traditional Chinese exercise, Qigong has potential benefits for the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This overview is aimed at assessing the existing evidence for the intervention of Qigong in COPD so as to provide scientific guidance for clinical decision-making. Methods. The systematic reviews (SRs)/meta-analyses (MAs) of Qigong for the treatment of COPD were obtained from 7 electronic databases with the search date set at April 5, 2022. Two researchers independently assessed the methodological quality, reporting quality, and evidence quality for the included SRs/MAs using the following tools: the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR-2), the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 (PRISMA 2020), and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Results. A total of 13 SRs/MAs were included in this overview. All SRs/MAs assessed by AMSTAR-2 had more than one critical defect, so all SR/MAs were rated very low. Regarding the assessment of reporting quality, the results of PRISMA 2020 showed that none of the SRs/MAs were fully reported. In addition, the results of the GRADE assessment of the quality of evidence indicated that only 3 outcomes were rated as high quality across all SRs/MAs. Conclusion. Current evidence suggests that Qigong is effective and safe for the management of patients with COPD. However, the high risk of bias in the original clinical studies and the low quality of the SRs/MAs reduced the reliability of the results.

Background. In China, the traditional Chinese medicine compound Xuefu Zhuoyue prescription (XFZY) has been widely used in the therapy of coronary heart disease (CHD). Currently, several systematic reviews (SRs)/meta-analyses (MAs) of XFZY for the treatment of CHD have been published. This overview aims to evaluate the existing SRs/MAs and provide a scientific basis for evaluating the efficacy and safety of XFZY for the therapy of CHD. Methods. The SRs/MAs of XFZY for the treatment of CHD were obtained from 7 electronic databases with the search date set at March 7, 2022. Two researchers independently assessed the methodological quality, reporting quality, and evidence quality of the included SRs/MAs using the following tools: the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR-2), the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 (PRISMA 2020), and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Results. A total of 11 SRs/MAs were included in this overview. All SRs/MAs assessed by means of AMSTAR-2 had more than one critical defect, so all SRs/MAs were rated low. Regarding the assessment of reporting quality, the results of PRISMA 2020 showed that none of the SRs/MAs were fully reported. In addition, the results of the GRADE assessment of the quality of evidence indicated that only one outcome was rated as high quality across all SRs/MAs. Conclusion. Current evidence suggests that XFZY is effective and safe for the management of patients with CHD. However, the high risk of bias of the original clinical studies and the low quality of the SRs/MAs reduced the reliability of the results.

Objectives. Tai Chi (TC) is a potential complementary treatment for essential hypertension (EH). This overview systematically summarizes and evaluates the existing evidence of TC in the therapy of EH. Methods. Systematic reviews (SRs)/meta-analyses (MAs) on TC interventions for EH were comprehensively searched in seven databases. Methodological quality, risk of bias, reporting quality, and quality of evidence were assessed by means of the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR-2), the Risk of Bias in Systematic (ROBIS) scale, the list of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA), as well as the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Results. Twelve published SRs/MAs were included in our study. According to the results of the AMSTAR-2, ROBIS, PRISMA, and GRADE assessment, only 1 SR/MA was assessed as high quality and only 1 SR/MA was assessed as low risk of bias. Only 2 SRs/MAs have been fully reported on the checklist. In addition to that, the quality of evidence was assessed for a total of 69 outcome indicators extracted from the SRs/MAs included in this overview, and only 3 items were assessed as high quality. Conclusions. TC may be an effective and safe complementary treatment for EH. However, this conclusion must be approached with caution, as the quality of the evidence provided by the SRs/MAs is usually low.