Objective: This article uses a meta-analysis system to evaluate the clinical efficacy of the method of spleen-invigorating, kidney-tonifying and blood-activating combined with western medicine in the treatment of diabetic nephropathy, in order to provide evidence-based medicine for the clinical treatment of this disease. Methods: Computer search (January 2009 to June 2020) published in CNKI, Wanfang database, and Weipu Chinese Science and Technology Journal Database with simple western medicine conventional treatment (control group) and on the basis of control group Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) of the treatment of diabetic nephropathy with spleen-invigorating, kidney-tonifying and blood-activating (experimental group), and manual retrieval of relevant literature that meets the inclusion criteria. Two researchers independently carried out literature screening, and used the improved Jadad rating scale for quality evaluation, and finally used RevMan5.3 statistical software for meta-analysis. Results: A total of 15 randomized controlled trials were included, with a total of 1218 patients, including 621 in the experimental group and 597 in the control group. Meta-analysis showed that the experimental group was improving clinical efficacy (OR=4.35, 95％ CI [3.12, 6.08], P<0.00001), FPG (MD=-0.49, 95％ CI [-0.89, -0.09], P=0.02 ), 24h urine protein quantification (MD=-0.54, 95％ CI [-0.90, -0.18], P=0.003), mALB (MD=-15.95, 95％ CI [-18.12, -13.79], P<0.0001) , BUN (MD=-1.79, 95％ CI [-2.99, -0.59], P=0.004), SCr (MD=-47.63, 95％ CI [-83.43, -11.83], P=0.009), TC (MD =-1.02, 95％ CI [-1.42, -0.62], P<0.00001), etc. may be better than the control group; The test group is improving TG (MD=-1.02, 95％ CI [-1.42, -0.62], P <0.00001) there is no significant difference compared with the control group. Conclusion: The method of spleen-invigorating, kidney-tonifying and blood-activating combined with conventional western medicine treatment of diabetic nephropathy may be superior to conventional western medicine treatment in terms of improving clinical efficacy, FPG, 24h urine protein quantification, mALB, BUN, SCr, TC, etc. However, due to the small number and low quality of the literature included in this study, more in-depth research needs to further expand the sample size and include higher quality RCTs.