Explore the vast range of titles available.

On the basis of estimates from a nationally representative sample of U.S. emergency departments from 2004 through 2013, approximately 23,000 emergency department visits annually are attributed to adverse events related to dietary supplements. Herbals (botanical products), complementary nutritionals (e.g., amino acids), and micronutrients (vitamins and minerals) are all considered to be dietary supplements by the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994. 1 Although supplements cannot be marketed for the treatment or prevention of disease, they are often taken to address symptoms or illnesses, as well as to maintain or improve overall health. 2 The estimated number of supplement products increased from 4000 in 1994 3 to more than 55,000 in 2012 (the most recent year for which data are publicly available), 4 and approximately half of all adults in the United States report having used . . .

AimThis study aimed to undertake a systematic review and meta-analysis of global prevalence and types of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use amongst adults with diabetes.MethodsNine databases, including MEDLINE and EMBASE, were searched for studies published between 2009 and 2019 which included extractable data for CAM use in adult patients with diabetes. Study characteristics, types of CAM, and overall and subgroup prevalence data in relation to CAM use were extracted. Meta-analysis of aggregate level data on prevalence and prevalence ratios (PRs) was performed using a random effects model.ResultsFrom the 38 studies included in the review, a total of 37 types of CAM and 223 types of herbs were identified. Pooled prevalence of CAM use was 51%. A wide variation in prevalence rates (predictive interval 8–93%) was observed. In the context of high heterogeneity, we found no evidence that CAM use was associated with gender, chronicity or type of diabetes. Approximately one third of patients did not disclose their use of CAM to healthcare professionals (95% PrI 25%, 97%). Herbal medicines, acupuncture, homoeopathy and spiritual healing were the common CAM types reported.ConclusionsA wide variation in prevalence of CAM use by patients with diabetes was identified. Healthcare professionals should be aware of their patients’ use of CAM to ensure treatment optimization, avoid herb–drug interactions and promote medication adherence in diabetes. Diabetic reviews and clinical guidelines should incorporate exploration of patient use of CAM as many patients do not proactively disclose the use of CAM to their healthcare professionals.RegistrationThe protocol for this study was registered with the Centre for Review and Dissemination (CRD). Protocol registration number CRD42019125036.

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most commonly diagnosed psychiatric disorders in childhood. A wide variety of treatments have been used for the management of ADHD. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of pharmacological, psychological and complementary and alternative medicine interventions for the treatment of ADHD in children and adolescents. We performed a systematic review with network meta-analyses. Randomised controlled trials (≥ 3 weeks follow-up) were identified from published and unpublished sources through searches in PubMed and the Cochrane Library (up to April 7, 2016). Interventions of interest were pharmacological (stimulants, non-stimulants, antidepressants, antipsychotics, and other unlicensed drugs), psychological (behavioural, cognitive training and neurofeedback) and complementary and alternative medicine (dietary therapy, fatty acids, amino acids, minerals, herbal therapy, homeopathy, and physical activity). The primary outcomes were efficacy (treatment response) and acceptability (all-cause discontinuation). Secondary outcomes included discontinuation due to adverse events (tolerability), as well as serious adverse events and specific adverse events. Random-effects Bayesian network meta-analyses were conducted to obtain estimates as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% credibility intervals. We analysed interventions by class and individually. 190 randomised trials (52 different interventions grouped in 32 therapeutic classes) that enrolled 26114 participants with ADHD were included in complex networks. At the class level, behavioural therapy (alone or in combination with stimulants), stimulants, and non-stimulant seemed significantly more efficacious than placebo. Behavioural therapy in combination with stimulants seemed superior to stimulants or non-stimulants. Stimulants seemed superior to behavioural therapy, cognitive training and non-stimulants. Behavioural therapy, stimulants and their combination showed the best profile of acceptability. Stimulants and non-stimulants seemed well tolerated. Among medications, methylphenidate, amphetamine, atomoxetine, guanfacine and clonidine seemed significantly more efficacious than placebo. Methylphenidate and amphetamine seemed more efficacious than atomoxetine and guanfacine. Methylphenidate and clonidine seemed better accepted than placebo and atomoxetine. Most of the efficacious pharmacological treatments were associated with harms (anorexia, weight loss and insomnia), but an increased risk of serious adverse events was not observed. There is lack of evidence for cognitive training, neurofeedback, antidepressants, antipsychotics, dietary therapy, fatty acids, and other complementary and alternative medicine. Overall findings were limited by the clinical and methodological heterogeneity, small sample sizes of trials, short-term follow-up, and the absence of high-quality evidence; consequently, results should be interpreted with caution. Clinical differences may exist between the pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment used for the management of ADHD. Uncertainties about therapies and the balance between benefits, costs and potential harms should be considered before starting treatment. There is an urgent need for high-quality randomised trials of the multiple treatments for ADHD in children and adolescents. PROSPERO, number CRD42014015008.

The increasing use of complementary and alternative medicines (CAMs) has been associated with a rising incidence of CAM-induced drug-induced liver injury (DILI). The aim of this study was to examine the clinical features and outcomes among patients with acute liver failure (ALF) and acute liver injury (ALI) enrolled in the Acute Liver Failure Study Group database, comparing CAM-induced with prescription medicine (PM)-induced DILI. A total of 2,626 hospitalized patients with ALF/ALI of any etiology were prospectively enrolled between 1998 and 2015 from 32 academic transplant centers. Only those with CAM or PM-induced ALI/ALF were selected for analysis. A total of 253 (9.6%) subjects were found to have idiosyncratic DILI, of which 41 (16.3%) were from CAM and 210 (83.7%) were due to PM. The fraction of DILI-ALF/ALI cases due to CAM increased from 1998-2007 to 2007-2015 (12.4 vs. 21.1%, P=0.047). There was no difference in the type of liver injury-hepatocellular, cholestatic, or mixed-between groups as determined by R score (P=0.26). PM-induced DILI showed higher serum alkaline phosphatase levels compared with the CAM group (median IU/L, 171 vs. 125, P=0.003). The CAM population had fewer comorbid conditions (1.0 vs. 2.0, P<0.005), higher transplantation rates (56 vs. 32%, P<0.005), and a lower ALF-specific 21-day transplant-free survival (17 vs. 34%, P=0.044). CAM-induced DILI is at least as severe in presentation as that observed due to PM with higher rates of transplantation and lower transplant-free survival in those who progress to ALF. This study highlights the increasing incidence of CAM-induced liver injury and emphasizes the importance of early referral and evaluation for liver transplantation when CAM-induced liver injury is suspected.

In Australia, it is estimated that around 17% to 87% of cancer patients have used one form of complementary therapy during their cancer treatment. There are numerous reasons and contributing factors for cancer patients to consider using complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). CAM information and products are readily available. However, the level of evidence to support the benefits of use in the cancer setting is limited, and the associated adverse effects and interactions with conventional medicine may not be fully studied. Besides, not all health professionals favor the concept of integrative health approaches, or have the confidence in dealing with CAM due to a lack of knowledge and standardization of practices. A thematic review of the literature was performed on the main contributing factors to cancer patients’ use of CAM, as well as the current issues that may be encountered by the patients and health professionals.

To assess the prevalence of and explanations for wheat avoidance, including reported symptoms, diagnoses and information sources influencing the decision to avoid wheat, and to investigate potential psychological predictors of this behaviour. Cross-sectional population survey. The study was conducted in Australia, using a nationwide postal omnibus survey. Adults aged 18 years and over (n 1184; 52·9% female) selected at random from the Australian Electoral Roll. With cases of stated and suspected coeliac disease (1·2%) excluded, 7·3% of the sample reported adverse physiological effects, predominantly gastrointestinal, that they associated with wheat consumption. Few among this group (5·7%) claimed a formally diagnosed intolerance or allergy requiring avoidance of wheat-based foods. Symptomatic wheat avoidance was highly correlated with dairy avoidance and predicted by gender (female), lesser receptiveness to conventional medicine and greater receptiveness to complementary medicine, but not by neuroticism, reasoning style or tendency to worry about illness. The data indicate that many adult Australians are consciously avoiding consumption of wheat foods, predominantly without any formal diagnosis. Reported symptoms suggest a physiological but not allergenic basis to this behaviour. Questions to be answered concern whether symptoms are attributed correctly to wheat, the agents (wheat components, dietary factors or additives) and physiological mechanism(s) involved, the nutritional adequacy of avoiders' diets, and the clinical and psychosocial processes that lead a substantial number of adults to avoid consuming wheat (or any other dietary factor) apparently independently of a medical diagnosis.

Background: The lack of a comprehensive assessment tool to evaluate patient understanding of the benefits and risks of complementary therapies (CTs) in diabetes management may lead to the unsafe use of CTs alongside conventional treatments, increased risk of misinformed decision-making, potential adverse interactions, and compromised health outcomes. Purpose: In this study, an instrument was developed to assess patient understanding of the benefits and risks of using CTs in diabetes management and its psychometric properties were evaluated. Methods: A two-phase design, including scale development and psychometric validation, was used. In Phase 1, the initial scale items were revised and confirmed by a panel of experts for content validity. In Phase 2, a cross-sectional survey was conducted to assess the scale's psychometric properties, including reliability and validity analyses. A sample of 307 outpatients with diabetes who had used CTs all completed a sociodemographic, clinical characteristics, and CT usage data sheet, as well as the Understanding the Benefits-Risks of CT Use in Diabetes Scale and the Diabetes Empowerment Scale. The developed scale was validated using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses that used structural equation modeling to confirm construct validity, Person correlation to confirm criterion-related validity, and Cronbach's α coefficient to confirm reliability. Results: The initial 16-item Understanding the Benefits-Risks of CT Use in Diabetes Scale was assessed as having a content validity index of .88. Factor analyses reduced the scale to 15 items in four dimensions, including the patient's medical condition for CT use (four items), the benefit-risk assessment of CTs use (four items), the suitability of CT use (five items), and the support from health care professionals (two items). The model met all goodness-of-fit indices (GFI=.90, AGFI=.90, CFI=.94, NFI=.926, RMSEA=.08, and χ2/df=3.14). The reliability analysis indicated good internal consistency (α=.912) and correlation with the Diabetes Empowerment Scale (r=.425). Conclusions/Implications for Practice: The Understanding the Benefits-Risks of CT Use in Diabetes Scale offers valuable insights for both patients and health care professionals. By providing a comprehensive assessment of patient knowledge and awareness of their CT use, this tool helps health care professionals identify gaps in patient understanding, tailor patient education, and ensure safe and effective integration of CTs into diabetes management programs.

Background: Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) is widely used around the world to treat adverse effects derived from cancer treatment among children and young adults. Parents often seek CAM to restore and maintain the child’s physical and emotional condition during and after cancer treatment. Objectives: The objectives of this review were (i) to identify literature that investigates CAM use for treating adverse effects of conventional cancer treatment, (ii) to investigate the safety of the included CAM modalities, and (iii) to evaluate the quality of included studies. Methods: Five scientific research databases were used to identify observational, quasi-experimental, and qualitative studies from January 1990 to May 2021. Included studies investigated the use of CAM to treat adverse effects of cancer treatment in childhood cancer. Results: Fifteen studies were included in this review. Ten quasi-experimental, 3 observational studies (longitudinal/prospective), 2 qualitative studies, and 1 study with a quasi-experimental and qualitative arm were identified. Less than half (n = 6; 40%) of the studies included reported adverse effects for the CAM modality being studied. Among the studies that reported adverse effects, they were mostly considered as direct risk, as 13% reported mainly bleeding and bruising upon acupuncture treatment, and dizziness with yoga treatment. All adverse effects were assessed as minor and transient. CAM modalities identified for treating adverse effects of cancer treatment were alternative medical systems, manipulative and body-based therapies, biologically-based therapies, and mind-body therapies. CAM modalities were used to alleviate anxiety, pain, toxicity, prevent trauma, and improve health-related quality of life, functional mobility, and physical activity levels. All studies assessed scored 70% or above according to the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal for study quality checklists. Conclusion: Most of the studies (58.3%) included in this review did not report adverse effects from CAM modalities used to treat adverse effects of cancer treatment in children and young adults. This lack of safety information is of concern because parents need to know whether the modality represents an extra burden or harm to the child. To improve awareness about safety in the field, a universal and uniform reporting system for adverse effects in CAM research is needed.

Background Complementary and alternative interventions are becoming increasingly utilized as adjuncts to conventional treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD). While the number of studies continues to grow, the vastness of the subject coupled with the relatively poor quality and small size of the studies limit their usefulness to clinicians. Purpose Our aim was to comprehensively review randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of complementary and alternative therapies for AD. Methods Searches were performed on PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, and the Global Resource for EczemA Trial (GREAT) databases, focusing on RCTs of alternative or complementary AD therapies, with a sample size of ≥10, through March 2015 and limited to the English language. A total of 70 manuscripts met the inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis. Results There is at least some level I evidence to support the use of acupuncture and acupressure, stress-reducing techniques such as hypnosis, massage, and biofeedback, balneotherapy, herbal preparations (with many important caveats), certain botanical oils, oral evening primrose oil, vitamin D supplementation, and topical vitamin B 12 . Many other therapies either have sufficient data to suggest that they are ineffective, or simply do not have enough evidence to formulate a verdict. Conclusions Careful review of the literature reveals several promising therapies in this domain; such findings may help direct further research that is necessary to bolster clinical recommendations for alternative or complementary treatments of AD.

Traditional and alternative medicines are widely used around the world and include for example herbal medicine, Ayurveda, traditional Chinese medicine, and indigenous therapies. Due to the long history and the mostly natural origin of traditional remedies, it is often assumed that they are harmless, but in recent decades more and more case reports have been published in which traditional medicine has caused metal poisoning. This paper provides an analysis of published cases in which patients have suffered metal poisoning due to traditional or alternative medicines. A systematic literature search was performed on PubMed, whereby 210 patient cases from a total of 102 case reports and 30 case series were identified and then analyzed about various aspects. Most of the traditional medicines involved come from Asia and are mainly contaminated with lead and arsenic. The analyzed patient cases show a high degree of heterogeneity with regard to age, sex, intake reason, symptoms, and severity of intoxication. The metal intoxication itself and the cause of the poisoning often remained unrecognized for a long time, which resulted in many patients undergoing unnecessary diagnostic methods and ineffective therapeutic approaches before the correct diagnosis was made. The evaluation of the available patient cases revealed a higher sensitivity to metal poisoning in children compared to adults and a higher sensitivity in men compared to women. Anemia and basophilic stippling were frequently observed and became more common as the metal content in the blood increased. Hopefully, this paper raises awareness of the potential dangers of traditional and alternative medicines, both from the patient’s and the doctor’s perspective, so that in case of intoxication, treatment can be initiated quickly using the correct diagnostic methods. As ingested metals do not only circulate in the blood but also accumulate in soft tissues and bones, long-term monitoring is necessary to ensure that patients make a full recovery. Doctors should be aware that, in contrast to common belief, men are more sensitive to this type of intoxication than women, necessitating particular attention for diagnosis and treatment.