Walker J Bryan
Professional and Scientific Relations, Procter and Gamble Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 1802 Charleston Circle, Birmingham, AL 35216, USA.
Pharmacotherapy. 2002 Dec;22(12):1611-5. doi: 10.1592/phco.22.17.1611.34126.
To evaluate the ability of seven widely known herbal references and electronic databases to answer questions about herbal products asked at drug information centers.
Cross-sectional study.
Five academic and institutional drug information centers.
Fifty-seven herbal-related questions were obtained from academic and institutional drug information centers. Seven herbal references and electronic databases were evaluated for their ability to answer these 57 questions: The Complete German Commission E Monographs: Therapeutic Guide to Herbal Medicines, 1st edition; Physicians' Desk Reference (PDR) for Herbal Medicines, 2001 edition; Tyler's Honest Herbal: A Sensible Guide to the Use of Herbs and Related Remedies, 4th edition; The Lawrence Review of Natural Products, 2001; Natural Medicines Comprehensive Database (electronically updated, 2001); The Natural Pharmacist (electronically updated, 2001); and AltMedDex (electronically updated, 2001).
Natural Medicines Comprehensive Database outperformed all other products evaluated, providing direct answers to 61% of questions. AltMedDex and The Natural Pharmacist performed similarly to one another, answering 49% and 44% of questions, respectively. The Lawrence Review of Natural Products, PDR for Herbal Medicines, The Complete German Commission E Monographs, and Tyler's Honest Herbal were the least helpful in providing direct answers to the questions (24%, 21%, 11%, and 9%, respectively).
Natural Medicines Comprehensive Database, AltMedDex, and The Natural Pharmacist outperformed all other evaluated herbal references and electronic databases in their ability to answer questions about herbal products posed in clinical practice.
评估七本广为人知的草药参考文献和电子数据库回答药物信息中心所提草药产品相关问题的能力。
横断面研究。
五个学术和机构性药物信息中心。
从学术和机构性药物信息中心获取了57个与草药相关的问题。对七本草药参考文献和电子数据库回答这57个问题的能力进行了评估：《德国委员会E专论全集：草药治疗指南》第1版；《医师桌上参考手册（草药）》2001年版；《泰勒氏实用草药：草药及相关疗法明智指南》第4版；《劳伦斯天然产物评论》2001年版；《天然药物综合数据库》（2001年电子更新版）；《天然药剂师》（2001年电子更新版）；以及《替代医学索引》（2001年电子更新版）。
《天然药物综合数据库》的表现优于所有其他评估产品，能直接回答61%的问题。《替代医学索引》和《天然药剂师》表现相似，分别回答了49%和44%的问题。《劳伦斯天然产物评论》、《医师桌上参考手册（草药）》、《德国委员会E专论全集》和《泰勒氏实用草药》在直接回答问题方面帮助最小（分别为24%、21%、11%和9%）。
在回答临床实践中提出的关于草药产品的问题方面，《天然药物综合数据库》、《替代医学索引》和《天然药剂师》的能力优于所有其他评估的草药参考文献和电子数据库。
