External Application of Herbal Medicines for Acne Vulgaris: A Systematic Review and Meta Analysis
| العنوان: | External Application of Herbal Medicines for Acne Vulgaris: A Systematic Review and Meta Analysis |
|---|---|
| المؤلفون: | Soo-Hyun Sung, Nam-Woo Lee, Byung-Cheul Shin, Gwang-Ho Choi |
| المصدر: | Journal of Pharmacopuncture Journal of Pharmacopuncture, Vol 23, Iss 1, Pp 8-17 (2020) |
| بيانات النشر: | The Korean Pharmacopuncture Institute (KPI), 2020. |
| سنة النشر: | 2020 |
| مصطلحات موضوعية: | medicine.medical_specialty, External application, lcsh:Medicine, Placebo, law.invention, 03 medical and health sciences, 0302 clinical medicine, Randomized controlled trial, external application, systematic review, law, Internal medicine, medicine, acne vulgaris, 030212 general & internal medicine, Adverse effect, lcsh:Miscellaneous systems and treatments, Acne, Pharmacology, business.industry, lcsh:R, lcsh:RM1-950, medicine.disease, lcsh:RZ409.7-999, Confidence interval, meta-analysis, lcsh:Therapeutics. Pharmacology, Complementary and alternative medicine, Meta-analysis, Relative risk, herbal medicine, randomized controlled trial, business, 030217 neurology & neurosurgery |
| الوصف: | Aim of the study The objective of this systematic review is to critically evaluate the evidence of the effectiveness and safety of external application of herbal medicines (EAHM) for acne vurgalis (AV). Methods English, Chinese and Korean language databases were searched up to May 2018. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that reported the effects of EAHM for AV were included and analysed. Results A total of 10 randomized trials with 656 AV patients were identified. A meta-analysis of two RCTs indicated that EAHM had a significant effect on improving primary outcome 'global assessment' compared with placebo (mean difference (MD) = -2.62, confidence interval (CI) = -4.84 to -0.40, p = 0.02). Furthermore, data extracted from two RCTs showed that EAHM significantly reduce primary outcome 'inflammatory lesion count of acne' (MD = -1.25, CI = -1.68 to -0.83, p < 0.00001) and 'non-inflammatory lesion count of acne' (MD = -1.32, CI = -1.75 to -0.90, p < 0.00001). No significant difference was observed between groups in secondary outcome 'sebum of skin' (MD = -0.21, CI = -0.53 to 0.11, p = 0.20) and 'patient-reported changes in symptom' (relative risk (RR) = 2.56, CI = 0.43 to 15.22, p = 0.30). No severe adverse events (AEs) were found and no treatment was stopped due to AEs of EAHM. Conclusions EAHM seems to have affirmative effects, but quality of evidence, and non-standardized use of EAHM make our conclusion weak. Our suggestion is rigorously designed RCTs and standardization of EAHM are required in the future. |
| اللغة: | English |
| تدمد: | 2234-6856 2093-6966 |
| URL الوصول: | https://explore.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=doi_dedup___::6f56bacc542c1715cbb35e5bd5148e30 http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC7163391 |
| حقوق: | OPEN |
| رقم الأكسشن: | edsair.doi.dedup.....6f56bacc542c1715cbb35e5bd5148e30 |
| قاعدة البيانات: | OpenAIRE |
| تدمد: | 22346856 20936966 |
|---|