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.