A.M.I. Barros , J. da Silva Vieira , P.H. Sette-de-Souza , A.P.V. Sobral , M.M.F. da Silveira
{"title":"Efficacy of Matricaria recutita (Chamomile) in the Prevention and/or Treatment of Oral Mucositis: Umbrella Review","authors":"A.M.I. Barros , J. da Silva Vieira , P.H. Sette-de-Souza , A.P.V. Sobral , M.M.F. da Silveira","doi":"10.1016/j.hermed.2024.100927","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>This study provides an overview of the systematic reviews on the efficacy of <em>Matricaria recutita</em> in the prevention and/or treatment of oral mucositis (OM) in patients undergoing oncological treatments in the head and neck region.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Searches were conducted in multiple databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science, adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses standards and registered in Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42021272283). The quality of the studies was analysed through the evaluation of Glenny scale and Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews-2 (AMSTAR 2).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Initially, 3,416 studies were evaluated for relevance, leading to the inclusion of 12 systematic reviews that specifically addressed the efficacy of M. recutita for the prevention and treatment of OM in oncological settings. Quantitatively, 75% of the systematic reviews were rated as high quality based on the Glenny Scale, indicating robust methodological design. However, a contrasting perspective from the AMSTAR 2 assessment highlighted that only one of these reviews (8.33%) met the criteria for high methodological quality. This discrepancy suggests significant variability in the quality assurance measures applied across the studies. The effectiveness of <em>M recutita</em> from potentially beneficial to inconclusive, with the majority suggesting that while the herb shows promise as a treatment option, the existing evidence is not sufficiently robust and is marked by considerable conflict due to methodological limitations and variability in study outcomes.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion/Conclusions</h3><p>The research underscores the need for additional randomized clinical trials to confirm the potential benefits of <em>M. recutita</em> in managing OM in managing OM.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":56077,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Herbal Medicine","volume":"48 ","pages":"Article 100927"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Herbal Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2210803324000848","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction
This study provides an overview of the systematic reviews on the efficacy of Matricaria recutita in the prevention and/or treatment of oral mucositis (OM) in patients undergoing oncological treatments in the head and neck region.
Methods
Searches were conducted in multiple databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science, adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses standards and registered in Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42021272283). The quality of the studies was analysed through the evaluation of Glenny scale and Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews-2 (AMSTAR 2).
Results
Initially, 3,416 studies were evaluated for relevance, leading to the inclusion of 12 systematic reviews that specifically addressed the efficacy of M. recutita for the prevention and treatment of OM in oncological settings. Quantitatively, 75% of the systematic reviews were rated as high quality based on the Glenny Scale, indicating robust methodological design. However, a contrasting perspective from the AMSTAR 2 assessment highlighted that only one of these reviews (8.33%) met the criteria for high methodological quality. This discrepancy suggests significant variability in the quality assurance measures applied across the studies. The effectiveness of M recutita from potentially beneficial to inconclusive, with the majority suggesting that while the herb shows promise as a treatment option, the existing evidence is not sufficiently robust and is marked by considerable conflict due to methodological limitations and variability in study outcomes.
Discussion/Conclusions
The research underscores the need for additional randomized clinical trials to confirm the potential benefits of M. recutita in managing OM in managing OM.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Herbal Medicine, the official journal of the National Institute of Medical Herbalists, is a peer reviewed journal which aims to serve its readers as an authoritative resource on the profession and practice of herbal medicine. The content areas of the journal reflect the interests of Medical Herbalists and other health professionals interested in the clinical and professional application of botanical medicines. The objective is to strengthen the research and educational base of herbal medicine with research papers in the form of case studies, original research articles and reviews, monographs, clinical trials and relevant in vitro studies. It also publishes policy statements, opinion pieces, book reviews, conference proceedings and profession related information such as pharmacovigilance reports providing an information source for not only the Herbal Practitioner but any Health professional with an interest in phytotherapy.