| Literature DB >> 35911428 |
Erni Setiyorini1, Mochammad Bagus Qomaruddin1, Sony Wibisono2, Titik Juwariah3, Anggi Setyowati4, Ning Arti Wulandari5, Yeni Kartika Sari5, Levi Tina Sari5.
Abstract
The use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is increasingly popular for the management of diabetes mellitus (DM). The aim of this study was to conduct systematic review of any types of complementary and alternative medicine for glycemic control of diabetes mellitus. Four databases was used in this study, the CINAHL, PUBMED, SCOPUS, and ProQUEST. The systematic review were reported according to the PRISMA guidelines. The keywords were used according to medical subject headings (MeSH) in this study were diabetes mellitus AND complementary and alternative medicine AND blood glucose levels or blood sugar or blood glucose. Articles were limited to 2015-2021 and only in English language. We obtained 231 articles from these databases: CINAHL six articles, PUBMED 85 articles, SCOPUS 66 articles, PROQUEST 74 articles. Then, the final results recorded 17 articles. The results of a systematic review showed the effectiveness of natural products as CAM for glycemic control of DM, namely Berberis aristata/Silybum marianum, fenugreek seed, bitter melon, cinnamon or whortleberry supplements, a combination of herbal plants (C. spinosa, R. canina, and S. securigera), Nigella sativa, Mulberry juice, chicory, chamomile tea, and bell pepper juice combined with an integrated approach of yoga therapy. Mind body practices such as auditory guided imagery (AGI), qigong and tai chi exercises, and relaxation. Whole system approach, such as acupressure. Health care providers consider CAM for DM management.Entities:
Keywords: Complementary and alternative medicine; diabetes mellitus; systematic review
Year: 2022 PMID: 35911428 PMCID: PMC9335474 DOI: 10.1177/22799036221106582
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Public Health Res ISSN: 2279-9028
Risk of bias.
| Title | Criteria (checklist “√”) | Value, % | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | ||
| Derosa et al.
| √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | 100 |
| Hadi et al.
| √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | 100 |
| Kim et al.
| √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | - | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | 92 |
| Mehrzadi et al.
| √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | 100 |
| Mirfeizi et al.
| √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | 100 |
| Moraes et al.
| √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | 100 |
| Moustafa et al.
| √ | - | √ | - | - | - | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | 69 |
| Nagasukeerthi et al.
| √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | - | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | 92 |
| Riche et al.
| √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | - | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | 92 |
| Zemestani et al.
| √ | √ | √ | √ | - | - | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | 84 |
| El-Shamy et al.
| √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | 100 |
| Fitrullah
| √ | √ | √ | √ | - | - | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | 84 |
| Kumar et al.
| √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | 100 |
| Mooventhan et al.
| √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | 100 |
| Gelernter et al.
| √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | 100 |
| Li et al.
| √ | √ | √ | √ | - | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | 92 |
| Paschali et al.
| √ | - | √ | - | - | - | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | 69 |
1.Was true randomization used for assignment of participants to treatment groups?, 2.Was allocation to treatment groups concealed?, 3.Were treatment groups similar at the baseline?, 4.Were participants blind to treatment assignment?, 5.Were those delivering treatment blind to treatment assignment?, 6.Were outcomes assessors blind to treatment assignment?, 7.Were treatment groups treated identically other than the intervention of interest?, 8.Was follow up complete and if not, were differences between groups in terms of their follow up adequately described and analyzed?, 9.Were participants analyzed in the groups to which they were randomized?, 10.Were outcomes measured in the same way for treatment groups?, 11.Were outcomes measured in a reliable way?, 12.Was appropriate statistical analysis used?, 13. Was the trial design appropriate, and any deviations from the standard RCT design (individual randomization, parallel groups) accounted for in the conduct and analysis of the trial?
Figure 1.Flowchart of the study selection.
Systematic reviews of natural product for diabetes mellitus published since January 2015 until September 2021.
| Author | Country | Intervention evaluated | Condition treated | Number of studies | Study design | Conclusion | Mention of adverse effects |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Derosa et al.
| Italia | Diabetes mellitus Type 1 | 85 | RCT | There was a decrease of FPG, and PPG with | Yes | |
| Hadi et al.
| Iran | Fenugreek seed (FS) | Diabetes mellitus Type 2 | 50 | RCT | FS consumption resulted in a significant decrease in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) | Yes |
| Kim et al.
| Korea | Diabetes mellitus Type 2 | 90 | RCT | the average fasting glucose level of the bitter melon group decreased | Yes | |
| Mehrzadi et al.
| Iran | Traditional herbal | Diabetes mellitus Type 2 | 150 | RCT | the fasting plasma glucose, HbA1c in herbal combination were decreased significantly | Yes |
| Mirfeizi et al.
| Iran | cinnamon or whortleberry supplements | Diabetes mellitus Type 2 | 105 | RCT | the use of cinnamon and whortleberry in addition to conventional medical treatment is recommended to adjust weight and blood glucose levels in patients with T2DM | Yes |
| Moraes et al.
| Iran | chicory inulin supplement | Type 2 diabetic mellitus (T2DM) | 46 | RCT | Significant reductions in fasting serum glucose (FSG), Hb A1C, AST and ALP concentrations were observed in chicory-treated group. | No |
| Moustafa et al.
| Egypt | Nigella sativa | Type 2 diabetic mellitus (T2DM) | 66 | RCT | NS oil administration at a dose of 1350 mg per day in newly diagnosed patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus was inferior to metformin in terms of lowering FBG, 2 h pp, A1C, %B | Yes |
| Nagasukeerthi et al.
| India | Bell pepper ( | Type 2 diabetic mellitus (T2DM) | 50 | RCT | a significant reduction in Post prandial blood glucose (PPBG), was observed in the study group | Yes |
| Riche et al.
| USA | Mulberry leaves | Type 2 diabetic mellitus (T2DM) | 24 | RCT | Post-prandial SMBG was significantly decreased at 3 months in the MLE group versus baseline | Yes |
| Zemestani et al.
| Iran | Chamomile tea | Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2 DM) | 64 | RCT | that short term intake of chamomile tea had beneficial effects on glycemic control and antioxidant status | Yes |
Systematic reviews of mind-body practices for diabetes mellitus published since January 2015 until September 2021.
| Author | Country | Intervention evaluated | Condition treated | Number of studies | Study design | Conclusion | Mention of adverse effects |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gelernter et al.
| Israel | Auditory guided imagery (AGI) accompanied by background music and background music solely (BMS) | Diabetes mellitus Type 1 | 13 children | RCT | Adding AGI sessions of 7 min, to the multidisciplinary management of pediatric population with T1DM may contribute to a decrease in short-term glucose concentration | No |
| Li et al.
| China | Qigong and tai chi exercises | Diabetes mellitus Type 2 | 103 | RCT | there was a significant negative correlation between the duration of T2DM and the relative changes in FPG levels after qigong intervention | Yes |
| Paschali et al.
| Greece | Relaxation training | Diabetes mellitus Type 1 (T1DM) | 46 | RCT | the main metabolic measurement of blood glucose levels and HbA1C revealed significant differences over time | No |
Systematic reviews of whole system approaches for diabetes mellitus published since January 2015 until September 2021.
| Author | Country | Intervention evaluated | Condition treated | Number of studies | Study design | Conclusion | Mention of adverse effects |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| El-Shamy et al.
| Egypt | Acupressure | Gestational diabetes mellitus | 30 female | RCT | After 12 weeks intervention had shown that 75 g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), insulin resistance, number of required insulin and measure of utilized insulin were significantly reduced | No |
| Fitrullah and Rousdy
| Indonesia | Acupressure | Diabetes mellitus | 30 | RCT | Acupressure at the Zusanli (ST 36) acu-point can lower blood glucose levels significantly | Yes |
| Kumar et al.
| India | Acupuncture | Diabetes mellitus Type 2 | 40 | RCT | A significant reduction in random blood glucose level in Acupuncture group compared to its baseline | No |
| Mooventhan et al.
| India | Acupuncture ST 36 | Diabetes mellitus Type 2 | 60 | RCT | The present study showed a significant reduction in random blood glucose levels in the acupuncture group compared to the placebo control group | No |