Graham D M, Blaiss M S
Department of Pediatrics, University of Tennessee, Memphis 38103, USA.
Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2000 Dec;85(6 Pt 1):438-47; quiz 447-9. doi: 10.1016/S1081-1206(10)62569-0.
This review will familiarize clinical allergists/immunologists with the common forms of complementary/alternative medicine (CAM) that are being used frequently by their patients. It reviews reasons that patients seek alternative health care therapies and the most common illnesses that are treated with this form of medicine. Cultural differences in CAM are also reviewed. The article focuses on specific therapies used to treat asthma and reviews the efficacy of these therapies based on the available scientific literature. The reader will also learn about views of other physicians on CAM and how this topic is being addressed in US medical schools.
Computer-assisted MEDLINE searches for articles on "complementary/alternative medicine" or "herbal therapy" and "asthma" or "atopy."
Pertinent abstracts and articles in the above areas were selected. Articles selected for detailed review included review articles of the subjects along with randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled studies in animals and humans.
Complementary/alternative medicine is commonly used by patients with chronic conditions including asthma. One-third of the US population has tried CAM. The literature supporting the efficacy of these therapies is lacking. Some reports elucidate the mechanism of action of certain herbal therapies that could possibly be helpful in the treatment of allergic diseases. There are, however, few well-controlled studies that support the efficacy of CAM in the treatment and clinical improvement of human subjects with asthma or atopic disorders.
Available scientific evidence does not support a role for CAM in the treatment of asthma. The studies in the literature often have significant design flaws that weaken the conclusions such as insufficient numbers of patients, lack of proper controls, and inadequate blinding. Further studies are needed to prove or disprove the efficacy of CAM. Physicians often find CAM intimidating because they are unaware of the clinical evidence and feel uncomfortable advising their patients on its efficacy. There is definitely a need for more education among physicians in this area. It is also important that physicians inquire and discuss the use of CAM with their patients since the majority of patients are using some form of CAM.
本综述将使临床过敏症专科医生/免疫学家熟悉其患者经常使用的补充/替代医学(CAM)的常见形式。它回顾了患者寻求替代医疗保健疗法的原因以及使用这种医学形式治疗的最常见疾病。还回顾了补充/替代医学中的文化差异。本文重点关注用于治疗哮喘的特定疗法,并根据现有科学文献综述这些疗法的疗效。读者还将了解其他医生对补充/替代医学的看法以及这个话题在美国医学院校是如何被探讨的。
通过计算机辅助在MEDLINE中检索关于“补充/替代医学”或“草药疗法”以及“哮喘”或“特应性”的文章。
挑选上述领域相关的摘要和文章。被选作详细综述的文章包括该主题的综述文章以及动物和人类的随机、双盲安慰剂对照研究。
患有包括哮喘在内的慢性病的患者经常使用补充/替代医学。美国三分之一的人口尝试过补充/替代医学。缺乏支持这些疗法疗效的文献。一些报告阐明了某些草药疗法可能有助于治疗过敏性疾病的作用机制。然而,很少有严格对照的研究支持补充/替代医学在治疗哮喘或特应性疾病患者以及改善其临床症状方面的疗效。
现有科学证据不支持补充/替代医学在哮喘治疗中的作用。文献中的研究往往存在重大设计缺陷,削弱了结论的可信度,如患者数量不足、缺乏适当对照和盲法不充分等。需要进一步研究来证明或反驳补充/替代医学的疗效。医生常常觉得补充/替代医学令人畏惧,因为他们不了解临床证据,并且在就其疗效向患者提供建议时感到不自在。在这一领域,医生之间确实需要更多的教育。同样重要的是,医生要询问并与患者讨论补充/替代医学的使用情况,因为大多数患者正在使用某种形式的补充/替代医学。