BABINE: An original and user-friendly scale for the simple and quick management of herb-drug interactions in clinical practice.

IF 3.3 2区 医学 Q1 INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE
Anthony Cnudde, Camille Allely, Natacha Biset, Pierre Champy, Nathalie Fouilhé, Fanny Huret, Sibi Lawson, Aline Mercan, Doris Pascale Noukela Noumi, Serge Michalet, Andrea Montis, Stephanie Pochet, Audrey Schils, Cecilia Tangeten, Michel Tod, Pierre Van Antwerpen, Audrey Vervacke, Florence Souard
{"title":"BABINE: An original and user-friendly scale for the simple and quick management of herb-drug interactions in clinical practice.","authors":"Anthony Cnudde, Camille Allely, Natacha Biset, Pierre Champy, Nathalie Fouilhé, Fanny Huret, Sibi Lawson, Aline Mercan, Doris Pascale Noukela Noumi, Serge Michalet, Andrea Montis, Stephanie Pochet, Audrey Schils, Cecilia Tangeten, Michel Tod, Pierre Van Antwerpen, Audrey Vervacke, Florence Souard","doi":"10.1186/s12906-024-04706-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>While more and more people tend to use herbal products thinking they are safer than conventional western medicine, the reality is other. If natural products are bio-active and possess potential therapeutic activities, then the benefit/risk balance should be considered like any other health product. Some herbs are known to have the potential to interact with patient's treatment and to cause adverse drug reactions. While these are scarce, they are potentially harmful, and can lead to major sequels and even death in some cases. Despite these known facts, little guidelines about how to evaluate the risk of interaction and to handle them exist in literature. Notably, few scales allowing to assess the risk of a specific combination of herbs and drugs exist.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We propose a new scoring method BABINE (Boosting Analysis of Bibliography for herb- drug INteraction Evaluation) and discuss a scale to evaluate this risk based on iterative rounds of experts' discussion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After 6 rounds of case reports/clinical studies evaluation, we analyzed and synthesized criteria identified as important by the experts and developed a corresponding evaluation scale.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Even if our scale greatly simplifies pharmacological events, we believe it provides a robust and transparent way to rapidly assess the risk of adverse event.</p>","PeriodicalId":9128,"journal":{"name":"BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies","volume":"24 1","pages":"414"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12906-024-04706-9","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: While more and more people tend to use herbal products thinking they are safer than conventional western medicine, the reality is other. If natural products are bio-active and possess potential therapeutic activities, then the benefit/risk balance should be considered like any other health product. Some herbs are known to have the potential to interact with patient's treatment and to cause adverse drug reactions. While these are scarce, they are potentially harmful, and can lead to major sequels and even death in some cases. Despite these known facts, little guidelines about how to evaluate the risk of interaction and to handle them exist in literature. Notably, few scales allowing to assess the risk of a specific combination of herbs and drugs exist.

Method: We propose a new scoring method BABINE (Boosting Analysis of Bibliography for herb- drug INteraction Evaluation) and discuss a scale to evaluate this risk based on iterative rounds of experts' discussion.

Results: After 6 rounds of case reports/clinical studies evaluation, we analyzed and synthesized criteria identified as important by the experts and developed a corresponding evaluation scale.

Conclusion: Even if our scale greatly simplifies pharmacological events, we believe it provides a robust and transparent way to rapidly assess the risk of adverse event.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE-
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
2.60%
发文量
300
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊介绍:
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信