| Literature DB >> 32020854 |
Carolina Miranda de Sousa Lima1, Mayara Amoras Teles Fujishima2, Bruno de Paula Lima3, Patrícia Carvalho Mastroianni4, Francisco Fábio Oliveira de Sousa5, Jocivânia Oliveira da Silva2.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The use of herbal medicine is on the rise worldwide, and safety issues associated with herbal medicines may have an exacerbated impact in elderly because this population has an increased susceptibility and sensitivity to health complications due to the aging process.Entities:
Keywords: Elderly individuals; Herbal medicines; Microbial contamination
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32020854 PMCID: PMC7076889 DOI: 10.1186/s12906-019-2723-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Complement Med Ther ISSN: 2662-7671
Demographic and socioeconomic characteristics of the elderly participants (N = 132)
| Demographics and Socioeconomic Index | N | % |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | ||
| Female | 104 | 78.8 |
| Male | 28 | 21.2 |
| Age group (years) | ||
| 60–69 | 78 | 59.1 |
| 70–79 | 39 | 29.5 |
| ≥80 | 15 | 11.4 |
| Marital status | ||
| Not married, widower or divorced | 70 | 52.9 |
| Married or in a stable union | 62 | 47.1 |
| Education level (years) | ||
| No schooling | 30 | 23.1 |
| > 1≥6 years | 67 | 50.5 |
| ≥7 years | 35 | 26.4 |
| Household income/month ($)a | ||
| ≤588.80 | 98 | 74.0 |
| > 588.80≥2650.00 | 29 | 22.1 |
| > 2.650.00 | 5 | 3.9 |
Macapa, Brazil, from 2016 to 2017
aUS dollars based on the Brazilian central bank [19] on 01/08/2018 (R$3.24)
Uses and characteristics of homemade herbal medicines and herbal medicinal products sold in different markets of Macapa, Brazil, from 2016 to 2017
| Uses and characteristics | Homemade herbal medicines | Commercial herbal medicine | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oral | |||
| Solid | 3 (5.8) | 8 (10.0) | 11 (8.4) |
| Semisolid | 5 (9.6) | 0 (0) | 5 (3.8) |
| Liquid | 33 (63.5) | 50 (62.5) | 83 (62.9) |
| Topical | |||
| Solid | 4 (7.7) | 0 (0) | 4 (3.0) |
| Semisolid | 2 (3.8) | 14 (17.5) | 16 (12.1) |
| Liquid | 5 (9.6) | 8 (10.0) | 13 (9.8) |
| Total | 52 (100) | 80 (100) | 132 (100) |
Herbal medicines most frequently used by elderly people. Macapa, Brazil, from 2016 to 2017
| Botanical namea | Popular name | Reported properties and uses | N (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cidreira | Relaxation and digestive problems | 18 (13.6) | |
| Boldo | Digestive and liver problems | 13 (9.9) | |
| Capim-marino | Relaxation and digestive problems | 11 (8.3) | |
| Andiroba | Inflammation, bruises | 8 (6.1) | |
| Copaíba | Inflammation, infections | 6 (4.5) | |
| Babatimão | Infections, wound healing, pain, inflammation | 6 (4.5) | |
| Canaficha | Kidney problems (diuretic effect) | 3 (2.3) | |
| Pariri | Pain, fever, inflammation and/or spasms | 3 (2.3) | |
| Sexual stimulants, inflammatory disease of the female reproductive system, rheumatic diseases, etc. | 51 (38.6) | ||
| Others | 13 (9.9) | ||
| Total | 132 (100) | ||
aThe classification of botanical names was performed according to THE PLANTS LIST® database [20]. The botanical identification of the herbal medicines obtained in pharmacies was derived from the labels / packages, and the herbal medicines obtained in gardens, fairs and popular markets were identified by visual comparison with pictures and images from online herbariums (reportedly used by the interviewees to provide relief against illnesses)
Determination of the total viable bacterial and fungal counts (CFU/g) in herbal medicine samples
| Herbal medicine | Acceptable limits (CFU/g ≤ 105)a count/g or mL | Unacceptable limits (CFU/g > 105)a count/g or mL | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total viable aerobic bacterial count | Total viable fungal count | Total viable aerobic bacterial count | Total viable fungal count | ||||
| Preparation | Use | Forms | Samples % (N) | % (N) | % (N) | % (N) | % (N) |
| Homemade herbal medicines | Oral | Solid | 5.3 (7) | 1.5 (2 ± 0.8) | 1.5 (2 ± 1.1) | 2.3 (3 ± 0.5) | 3.0 (4 ± 1.8) |
| Semisolid | 1.5 (2) | 0 (0 ± 0.2) | 0 (0) | 0.8 (1 ± 0.2) | 0.8 (1 ± 1.0) | ||
| Liquid | 23.5 (31) | 10.6 (14 ± 1.2) | 3.0 (4 ± 1.1) | 10.6 (14 ± 1.5) | 3.0 (4 ± 2.3) | ||
| Topical | Solid | 3.0 (4) | 0.8 (1 ± 0.3) | 0 (0) | 1.5 (2 ± 0.4) | 1.5 (2 ± 2.0) | |
| Semisolid | 2.3 (3) | 0 (0) | 0.8 (1 ± 0.2) | 0 (0) | 0.8 (1 ± 0.8) | ||
| Liquid | 3.8 (5) | 0 (0) | 1.5 (2 ± 1.0) | 1.5 (2 ± 0.5) | 1.5 (2 ± 1.4) | ||
| Total | 39.4 (52) | 12.9 (17 ± 1.8) | 6.8 (9 ± 0.9) | 16.7 (22 ± 2.3) | 10.6 (14 ± 1.9) | ||
| Commercial herbal medicines | Oral | Solid | 7.6 (10) | 0.8 (1 ± 0.5) | 1.5 (2 ± 0.5) | 3.0 (4 ± 0.5) | 3.0 (4 ± 1.3) |
| Semisolid | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | ||
| Liquid | 36.4 (48) | 6.0 (8 ± 1.1) | 3.0 (4 ± 1.2) | 8.3 (11 ± 1.8) | 8.3 (11 ± 2.3) | ||
| Topical | Solid | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | |
| Semisolid | 10.6 (14) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 1.5 (2 ± 0.5) | 1.5 (2 ± 1.0) | ||
| Liquid | 6.0 (8) | 0 (0) | 0.8 (1 ± 1.0) | 2.3 (3 ± 0.8) | 3.8 (5 ± 1.1) | ||
| Total | 60.6 (80) | 6.8 (9 ± 1.1) | 5.3 (7 ± 1.2) | 15.1 (20 ± 1.5) | 16.7 (22 ± 1.9) | ||
| Grand total | 100 (132) | 26 (19.7) | 16 (12.1) | 42 (31.8) | 31 (23.5) | ||
Macapa, Brazil, from 2016 to 2017
aMicrobial contamination limits in herbal materials, preparations and finished products according to WHO standards [3]. All experiments were completed in triplicate, (N) represents absolute values as mean and standard deviation
Pathogenic bacterial species isolated from herbal medicines consumed by elderly individuals
| Herbal medicine | Bacterial isolates* | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Preparation | Use | Forms | Samples % (N) | ||||
| Homemade herbal medicines | Orala | Solid | 5.3 (7) | 1.5 (2 ± 0.8) | 1.5 (2 ± 0.2) | 0 (0) | 3.0 (4 ± 0.3) |
| Semisolid | 1.5 (2) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 1.5 (2 ± 0.1) | 0.8 (1 ± 0.2) | ||
| Liquid | 23.5 (31) | 12.9 (17 ± 0.4) | 15.9 (21 ± 0.6) | 8.3 (11 ± 0.4) | 20.4 (27 ± 0.9) | ||
| Topical | Solid | 3.0 (4) | 3.0 (4 ± 0.6) | 3.0 (4 ± 0.1) | 0 (0) | 1.5 (2 ± 0.2) | |
| Semisolid | 2.3 (3) | 2.3 (3 ± 0.4) | 3.8 (5 ± 0.3) | 0 (0) | 6.8 (9 ± 0.5) | ||
| Liquid | 3.8 (5) | 1.5 (2 ± 0.1) | 3.0 (4 ± 0.1) | 0 (0) | 2.3 (3 ± 0.2) | ||
| Total | 39.4 (52) | 39.4 (52) | 69.2 (36) | 25.0 (13) | 88.5 (46) | ||
| Commercial herbal medicine | Orala | Solid | 7.6 (10) | 0.8 (1 ± 0.2) | 0 (0) | 1.5 (2 ± 0.2) | 6.1 (8 ± 0.6) |
| Semisolid | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | ||
| Liquid | 36.4 (48) | 1.5 (2 ± 0.3) | 3.0 (4 ± 0.2) | 1.5 (2 ± 0.1) | 4.5 (6 ± 0.4) | ||
| Topical | Solid | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | |
| Semisolid | 10.6 (14) | 0 (0) | 3.0 (4 ± 0.1) | 0 (0) | 2.3 (3 ± 0.5) | ||
| Liquid | 6.0 (8) | 2.3 (3 ± 0.4) | 1.5 (2 ± 0.1) | 1.5 (2 ± 0.1) | 1.5 (2 ± 0.1) | ||
| Total | 60.6 (80) | 60.6 (80) | 12.5 (10) | 7.5 (6) | 23.8 (19) | ||
| Grand total | 132 (100) | 25.8 (34) | 81.7 (46) | 14.4 (19) | 49.2 (65) | ||
Macapa, Brazil, from 2016 to 2017
*Presence in 1 g or 1 mL of sample [3]. All experiments were completed in triplicate, (N) represents absolute values as mean and standard deviation
aGram-negative, b gram-positive
Total coliforms and E. coli detection in different water samples used to prepare homemade herbal medicines (N = 18)
| Parametera | N | % |
|---|---|---|
| Total coliforms | ||
| Yes | 14 | 77.8 |
| No | 4 | 22.2 |
| Yes | 12 | 66.7 |
| No | 6 | 33.3 |
Macapa, Brazil, from 2016 to 2017
aMicrobial contamination limits in herbal materials, preparations and finished products according to WHO standards [3]. All experiments were completed three times, and the results were reproducible