Skip to main content

Table 4 Summary results of adverse events

From: Effectiveness and safety of Tuina massage therapy for paediatric fever: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Intervention

Study

Experimental group

Control group

Pooled RRs (95% CI)

Heterogeneity

Crying

 Tepid massage + antipyretic drug vs. antipyretic drug alone

Alves, 2008

27/52 (51.9%)

0/54 (0%)

57.08 (3.57 to 912.06)

N/A

Shivering, goose pimples, discomfort

 Tepid massage vs. antipyretic drug alone

Steele, 1970

5/15 (33.3%)

2/25 (8.0%)

4.17 (0.92 to 18.86)

N/A

 Tepid massage + antipyretic drug vs. antipyretic drug alone

Alves, 2008

19/52 (36.5%)

2/54 (3.7%)

6.05 (2.41 to 15.18)

P = 0.58, I2 = 0%

Mahar, 1994

1/35 (2.8%)

0/40 (0%)

Sharber, 1997

7/10 (70%)

0/10 (0%)

Steele, 1970

6/25 (24.0%)

2/25 (8.0%)

Convulsion

 Tepid massage vs. antipyretic drug alone

Agbolosu, 1997

1/40 (2.5%)

0/40 (0%)

3.00 (0.13 to 71.51)

N/A

  1. CI confidence interval, RRs risk ratios