OBJECTIVE: This review was aimed to summarize and critically discuss the convincing evidence for the therapeutic effectiveness of phytomedicines for the treatment of AD and explore their anti-AD efficacy.
RESULTS: The critical analysis of a wide algorithm of herbal medicines revealed that their remarkable anti-AD efficacy is attributed to their potential of reducing erythema intensity, oedema, inflammation, transepidermal water loss (TEWL) and a remarkable suppression of mRNA expression of ADassociated inflammatory biomarkers including histamine, immunoglobulin (Ig)-E, prostaglandins, mast cells infiltration and production of cytokines and chemokines in the serum and skin biopsies.
CONCLUSION: In conclusion, herbal medicines hold great promise as complementary and alternative therapies for the treatment of mild-to-moderate AD when used as monotherapy and for the treatment of moderate-to-severe AD when used in conjunction with other pharmacological agents.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed at two chemotherapy providers. Patients were questioned about use of three categories of CAM, mind-body practices (MBPs), natural products (NPs) and traditional medicine (TM). PFH was also examined separately from CAM to better characterise the patterns of CAM and PFH used during chemotherapy.
RESULTS: A total of 546 eligible patients participated in the study; 70.7% (n = 386) reported using some form of CAM, and 29.3% (n = 160) were non-CAM users. When PFH was excluded as a CAM, fewer patients reported the use of CAM (66.1%; n = 361). The total number of patients who used MBPs decreased from 342 to 183. The most common CAM use category was NPs (82.8%), followed by MBPs (50.7%), and TM (35.7%). CAM users were more likely to have a tertiary education (OR 2.11, 95% CI 1.15-3.89 vs. primary/lower), have household incomes > RM 3,000 (≈944 USD) per month (OR 2.32, 95% CI 1.40-3.84 vs. ≤RM 3,000 (≈944 USD)), and have advanced cancer (OR 1.75, 95% CI 1.18-2.59 vs. early stage cancer), compared with non-CAM users. The CAM users were less likely to have their chemotherapy on schedule (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.10-0.58 vs. chemotherapy postponed) than non-CAM users. Most MBPs were perceived to be more helpful by their users, compared with the users of NPs and TM.
CONCLUSION: CAM use was prevalent among breast cancer patients. Excluding PFH from the definition of CAM reduced the prevalence of overall CAM use. Overall, CAM use was associated with higher education levels and household incomes, advanced cancer and lower chemotherapy schedule compliance. Many patients perceived MBP to be beneficial for improving overall well-being during chemotherapy. These findings, while preliminary, clearly indicate the differences in CAM use when PFH is included in, and excluded from, the definition of CAM.
AIM: This study aims to present the status and use of TM and determine the factors associated with its use among patients with HIV/AIDS on highly active ART in a tertiary health institution in Sokoto, Northwest Nigeria.
METHODOLOGY: This was a descriptive, cross-sectional study involving HIV/AIDS patients attending antiretroviral treatment center of the Usmanu Danfodiyo University Teaching Hospital (UDUTH), Sokoto, Nigeria. The study population comprised PLWHAs attending the ART clinic of the hospital (UDUTH). A total of 271 respondents were recruited into the study and administered a set of pretested structured questionnaire. Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the ethical committee of the teaching hospital.
RESULTS: Only 11 (4.2%) of the respondents had used TM before, of whom 9 (5%) were females and 2 (2.7%) were males with P = 0.399. Only one of the respondents had side effects following the use of TM, and the most common reason for the use of TM was as a result of too much weight loss.
CONCLUSION: Although the use of TM among the study participants in Sokoto was low, there is need to educate PLWHAs about the possible risks of interactions following the concurrent use of TM and ART.
METHODOLOGY: A cross-sectional survey was conducted at two outpatient chemotherapy centers. A total of 546 patients completed the questionnaires on CAM use. QOL was evaluated based on the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) core quality of life (QLQ-C30) and breast cancer-specific quality of life (QLQ-BR23) questionnaires.
RESULTS: A total of 70.7% of patients were identified as CAM users. There was no significant difference in global health status scores and in all five subscales of the QLQ C30 functional scales between CAM users and non-CAM users. On the QLQ-C30 symptom scales, CAM users (44.96±3.89) had significantly (p = 0.01) higher mean scores for financial difficulties than non-CAM users (36.29±4.81). On the QLQ-BR23 functional scales, CAM users reported significantly higher mean scores for sexual enjoyment (6.01±12.84 vs. 4.64±12.76, p = 0.04) than non-CAM users. On the QLQ-BR23 symptom scales, CAM users reported higher systemic therapy side effects (41.34±2.01 vs. 37.22±2.48, p = 0.04) and breast symptoms (15.76±2.13 vs. 11.08±2.62, p = 0.02) than non-CAM users. Multivariate logistic regression analysis indicated that the use of CAM modality was not significantly associated with higher global health status scores (p = 0.71).
CONCLUSION: While the findings indicated that there was no significant difference between users and non-users of CAM in terms of QOL, CAM may be used by health professionals as a surrogate to monitor patients with higher systemic therapy side effects and breast symptoms. Furthermore, given that CAM users reported higher financial burdens (which may have contributed to increased distress), patients should be encouraged to discuss the potential benefits and/or disadvantages of using CAM with their healthcare providers.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This qualitative study was designed to identify the roles traditional healers play in cancer diagnosis and treatment, with an eye to alleviating the cancer burden through educational responses with four publics in mind-policy makers, Western medical personnel, traditional healers, and the general public. In-depth interviews were conducted with 14 Malay traditional healers, 13 cancer survivors who had seen both traditional healers and Western doctors, and 12 cancer medical specialists.
RESULTS: Analysis of the data from these 39 participants revealed four roles traditional healers play in cancer treatment-medicinal healer, emotional comforter, spiritual guide, and palliative caregiver.
CONCLUSIONS: Three roles (emotional, spiritual, palliative) can be seen as complementary to the allopathic system. Emotional and spiritual roles may augment the effectiveness of biomedical treatment. Cancer awareness and education programs need to position traditional healers as complementary, rather than an alternative to Western medical treatment; Validating the roles Traditional Healers can play in cancer treatment in MY through health promotion and education will contribute to alleviating the nation's cancer burden.