The Efficacy of Complementary and Alternative Medicines in Medical Dermatology: A Comprehensive Review.

Q2 Medicine
Promise Ufomadu, Bartley Joseph Gill, Ida Orengo, Theodore Rosen, Ikue Shimizu
{"title":"The Efficacy of Complementary and Alternative Medicines in Medical Dermatology: A Comprehensive Review.","authors":"Promise Ufomadu, Bartley Joseph Gill, Ida Orengo, Theodore Rosen, Ikue Shimizu","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In recent years, there has been a widespread patient use of complementary and alternative medicines (CAMs) for dermatological application, despite few RCT-level studies on these supplements. This creates a barrier for dermatologists and others in counseling patients who may be using or might be tempted to use these CAM agents. This review investigates various CAM modalities used by patients for medical dermatology, exploring their efficacy and toxicity profiles.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive review was performed on the effectiveness of several CAMs utilized in medical dermatology by patients. A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Cochrane.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most CAM modalities had statistically insignificant results, and for agents that had significant results in efficacy, these studies were questionable with flawed designs and methodologies.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These CAM supplements have promising potential in dermatologic use and are deserving of further investigation in well-crafted RCT-level studies. A more practical focus in future studies should involve a comparison of CAM agents to conventional therapies either alone or in an integrative fashion. This would accurately represent how these agents will be used clinically by actual patients and will be more helpful to clinicians. In the meantime, dermatologists should be aware of bias in published studies demonstrating the effectiveness of certain CAM modalities, and their corresponding toxicity. By doing so, physicians act as a valuable resource to patients who would like to explore various CAM products, better guiding patient interactions and treatment with improved patient outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":53616,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Aesthetic Dermatology","volume":"18 2","pages":"E61-E79"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11896621/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical and Aesthetic Dermatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In recent years, there has been a widespread patient use of complementary and alternative medicines (CAMs) for dermatological application, despite few RCT-level studies on these supplements. This creates a barrier for dermatologists and others in counseling patients who may be using or might be tempted to use these CAM agents. This review investigates various CAM modalities used by patients for medical dermatology, exploring their efficacy and toxicity profiles.

Methods: A comprehensive review was performed on the effectiveness of several CAMs utilized in medical dermatology by patients. A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Cochrane.

Results: Most CAM modalities had statistically insignificant results, and for agents that had significant results in efficacy, these studies were questionable with flawed designs and methodologies.

Conclusion: These CAM supplements have promising potential in dermatologic use and are deserving of further investigation in well-crafted RCT-level studies. A more practical focus in future studies should involve a comparison of CAM agents to conventional therapies either alone or in an integrative fashion. This would accurately represent how these agents will be used clinically by actual patients and will be more helpful to clinicians. In the meantime, dermatologists should be aware of bias in published studies demonstrating the effectiveness of certain CAM modalities, and their corresponding toxicity. By doing so, physicians act as a valuable resource to patients who would like to explore various CAM products, better guiding patient interactions and treatment with improved patient outcomes.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
104
×
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