Centre for Safety and Quality in Health, Department of Pharmacy Practice, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Naresuan University, Phitsanulok, Thailand.
Department of Pharmaceutical and Biological Chemistry, School of Pharmacy, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2024 Aug 29;10:e63808. doi: 10.2196/63808.
Herbal medicines (HMs) are extensively used by consumers/patients worldwide. However, their safety profiles are often poorly reported and characterized. Previous studies have documented adverse events (AEs) associated with HMs, such as hepatotoxicity, renal failure, and allergic reactions. However, the prevalence rate of AEs related to HMs has been reported to be low. To date, no systematic review and meta-analysis has comprehensively analyzed the AEs of HMs using published data acquired from pharmacovigilance (PV) databases.
This study aimed to (1) estimate the reporting rate of the AEs of HMs using PV databases and (2) assess the detailed data provided in AE reports.
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, MEDLINE/PubMed, SCOPUS, EMBASE, and CINAHL were systematically searched for relevant studies (until December 2023). The DerSimonian-Laird random effects model was used for pooling the data, and subgroup analyses, the meta-regression model, and sensitivity analysis were used to explore the source of heterogeneity. Crombie's checklist was used to evaluate the risk of bias (ROB) of the included studies.
In total, 26 studies met the eligibility criteria. The reporting rate of the AEs of HMs ranged considerably, from 0.03% to 29.84%, with a median overall pooled estimate of 1.42% (IQR 1.12%-1.72%). Subgroup analyses combined with the meta-regression model revealed that the reporting rate of the AEs of HMs was associated with the source of the reporter (P=.01). None of the included studies provided full details of suspected herbal products, only the main ingredients were disclosed, and other potentially harmful components were not listed.
This systematic review and meta-analysis highlighted risks related to HMs, with a wide range of reporting rates, depending on the source of the reporter. Continuous efforts are necessary to standardize consumer reporting systems in terms of the reporting form, education, and follow-up strategy to improve data quality assurance, aiming to enhance the reliability and utility of PV data for monitoring the safety of HMs. Achieving effective monitoring and reporting of these AEs necessitates collaborative efforts from diverse stakeholders, including patients/consumers, manufacturers, physicians, complementary practitioners, sellers/distributors, and health authorities.
PROSPERO (Prospective International Register of Systematic Reviews) CRD42021276492.
草药(HMs)在全球范围内被消费者/患者广泛使用。然而,它们的安全性通常报道和描述得很差。以前的研究已经记录了与 HMs 相关的不良事件(AEs),例如肝毒性、肾衰竭和过敏反应。然而,据报道,与 HMs 相关的 AEs 的患病率较低。迄今为止,尚无系统评价和荟萃分析使用从药物警戒(PV)数据库中获取的已发表数据全面分析 HMs 的 AEs。
本研究旨在(1)使用 PV 数据库估计 HMs 的 AEs 报告率,(2)评估 AE 报告中提供的详细数据。
在这项系统评价和荟萃分析中,系统地检索了 MEDLINE/PubMed、SCOPUS、EMBASE 和 CINAHL 中的相关研究(截至 2023 年 12 月)。使用 DerSimonian-Laird 随机效应模型对数据进行合并,进行亚组分析、荟萃回归模型和敏感性分析以探索异质性的来源。使用 Crombie 清单评估纳入研究的偏倚风险(ROB)。
共有 26 项研究符合入选标准。HMs 的 AEs 报告率差异很大,从 0.03%到 29.84%,总体中位数合并估计值为 1.42%(IQR 1.12%-1.72%)。亚组分析结合荟萃回归模型表明,HMs 的 AEs 报告率与报告者的来源有关(P=.01)。纳入的研究均未提供可疑草药产品的详细信息,仅披露了主要成分,未列出其他潜在有害成分。
本系统评价和荟萃分析强调了与 HMs 相关的风险,报告率范围很广,取决于报告者的来源。需要不断努力,在报告形式、教育和随访策略方面使消费者报告系统标准化,以提高数据质量保证,旨在提高用于监测 HMs 安全性的 PV 数据的可靠性和实用性。要实现对这些 AEs 的有效监测和报告,需要来自不同利益相关者的协作努力,包括患者/消费者、制造商、医生、补充从业者、销售商/分销商和卫生当局。
PROSPERO(前瞻性国际系统评价注册库)CRD42021276492。