Assessing the risks and benefits of herbal medicine: an overview of scientific evidence.
Assessing the risks and benefits of herbal medicine: an overview of scientific evidence.
复制标题
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
1999-07
影响因子：
1.5
通讯作者：
B. Barrett;D. Kiefer;D. Rabago
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
B. Barrett;D. Kiefer;D. Rabago
草药的使用很普遍，而且还在不断增长，每年有多达3/10的美国人使用植物疗法。由于许多草药具有显著的药理活性，因此潜在的不良反应和药物相互作用，医疗保健专业人员必须熟悉这种治疗方式。本文概述了植物性药物的历史和使用现状，并重点介绍了与6种植物相关的风险和益处的证据：紫锥菊、大蒜、生姜、银杏、圣约翰草和缬草。医学主流之外的疗法往往缺乏研究和批判性评估。批评者和支持者都指出，研究许多补充疗法和替代疗法，如针灸、顺势疗法和冥想，在概念上和实践上都存在困难。然而，草药很适合标准的评估方法。本文总结和评价了来自随机对照试验和荟萃分析的证据。我们介绍了大蒜和圣约翰草的荟萃分析和随后的随机对照试验的结果；银杏的全面的关键综述和随后的随机对照试验；以及所有已确定的紫锥菊、生姜和缬草的随机对照试验的总结。
The use of herbal medicine is widespread and growing, with as many as 3 in 10 Americans using botanical remedies in a given year. Because many herbal medicines have significant pharmacological activity, and thus potential adverse effects and drug interactions, healthcare professionals must be familiar with this therapeutic modality. This article summarizes the history and current use of plant-based medicine and highlights the evidence of the risks and benefits associated with 6 plants: echinacea, garlic, ginger, ginkgo, St John's wort, and valerian. Therapies outside the medical mainstream tend to suffer from a dearth of research and critical evaluation. Critics and supporters alike note the conceptual and practical difficulties in studying many complementary and alternative therapies such as acupuncture, homeopathy, and meditation. Herbal medicine, however, lends itself well to standard evaluation methods. This article summarizes and evaluates evidence from randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses. We present the results of meta-analyses and subsequent randomized controlled trials for garlic and St John's wort; a comprehensive critical review and subsequent randomized controlled trials for ginkgo; and summaries of all identified randomized controlled trials for echinacea, ginger, and valerian.