Dataset Information

Effectiveness and Safety of Ayurvedic Medicines in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Management: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT: Introduction: Many Ayurvedic medicines have the potential for managing type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), with previous systematic reviews demonstrating effectiveness and safety for specific Ayurvedic medicines. However, many of the reviews need updating and none provide a comprehensive summary of all the Ayurvedic medicines evaluated for managing T2DM. Objective: The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate and synthesize evidence on the effectiveness and safety of Ayurvedic medicines for managing T2DM. Inclusion criteria: Published and unpublished RCTs assessing the effectiveness and safety of Ayurvedic medicines for managing T2DM in adults. Methods: The JBI systematic review methodology was followed. A comprehensive search of sources (including 18 electronic databases) from inception to 16 January 2021 was made. No language restrictions were applied. Data synthesis was conducted using narrative synthesis and random effects meta-analyses, where appropriate. Pooled results are reported as mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Out of 32,519 records identified from the searches, 219 articles were included in the systematic review representing 199 RCTs (21,191 participants) of 98 Ayurvedic medicines. Overall, in the studies reviewed the methodology was not adequately reported, resulting in poorer methodological quality scoring. Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) was reduced using Aegle marmelos (L.) Corrêa (MD -1.6%; 95% CI -3 to -0.3), Boswellia serrata Roxb. (-0.5; -0.7 to -0.4), Gynostemma pentaphyllum (Thunb.) Makino (-1; -1.5 to -0.6), Momordica charantia L. (-0.3; -0.4 to -0.1), Nigella sativa L. (-0.4; -0.6 to -0.1), Plantago ovata Forssk. (-0.9; -1.4 to -0.3), Tinospora cordifolia (Willd.) Hook.f. and Thomson (-0.5; -0.6 to -0.5), Trigonella foenum-graecum L. (-0.6; -0.9 to -0.4), and Urtica dioica L. (-1.3; -2.4 to -0.2) compared to control. Similarly, fasting blood glucose (FBG) was reduced by 4-56 mg/dl for a range of Ayurvedic medicines. Very few studies assessed health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Adverse events were not reported in many studies, and if reported, these were mostly none to mild and predominately related to the gastrointestinal tract. Conclusion: The current evidence suggests the benefit of a range of Ayurvedic medicines in improving glycemic control in T2DM patients. Given the limitations of the available evidence and to strengthen the evidence base, high-quality RCTs should be conducted and reported.

SUBMITTER: Chattopadhyay K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9213670 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Patient activation interventions (PAIs) engage patients in care by promoting increased knowledge, confidence, and/or skills for disease self-management. However, little is known about the impact of these interventions on a wide range of outcomes for adults with type 2 diabetes (DM2), or which of these interventions, if any, have the greatest impact on glycemic control.Electronic databases were searched from inception through November 2011. Of 16,290 citations, two independent reviewers identified 138 randomized trials comparing PAIs to usual care/control groups in adults with DM2 that reported intermediate or long-term outcomes or harms. For meta-analyses of continuous outcomes, we used a random-effects model to derive pooled weighted mean differences (WMD). For all-cause mortality, we calculated the pooled odds ratio (OR) using Peto's method. We assessed statistical heterogeneity using the I (2) statistic and conducted meta-regression using a random-effects model when I (2)?>?50 %. A priori meta-regression primary variables included: intervention strategies, intervention leader, baseline outcome value, quality, and study duration.PAIs modestly reduced intermediate outcomes [A1c: WMD 0.37 %, CI 0.28-0.45 %, I (2) 83 %; SBP: WMD 2.2 mmHg, CI 1.0-3.5 mmHg, I (2) 72 %; body weight: WMD 2.3 lbs, CI 1.3-3.2 lbs, I (2) 64 %; and LDL-c: WMD 4.2 mg/dL, CI 1.5-6.9 mg/dL, I (2) 64 %]. The evidence was moderate for A1c, low/very low for other intermediate outcomes, low for long-term mortality and very low for complications. Interventions had no effect on hypoglycemia (evidence: low) or short-term mortality (evidence: moderate). Higher baseline A1c, pharmacist-led interventions, and longer follow-up were associated with larger A1c improvements. No intervention strategy outperformed any other in adjusted meta-regression.PAIs modestly improve A1c in adults with DM2 without increasing short-term mortality. These results support integration of these interventions into primary care for adults with uncontrolled glycemia, and provide evidence to insurers who do not yet cover these programs.

Project description:BackgroundThe proliferation of digital technology has the potential to transform diabetes management. One of the critical aspects of modern diabetes management remains the achievement of glycemic targets to avoid acute and long-term complications.ObjectiveThis study aims to describe the landscape of evidence pertaining to the relative effectiveness or efficacy and safety of various digital interventions for the self-management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), with a primary focus on reducing glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels.MethodsA systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted by searching Embase, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL on April 5, 2022. Study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed by 2 independent reviewers. Eligibility criteria for the SLR included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and comparative observational studies evaluating interventions containing both human (eg, coaching) and digital components (eg, glucose meter) in adult patients with T2DM. The primary meta-analysis was restricted to studies that reported laboratory-measured HbA1c. In secondary analyses, meta-regression was performed with the intensity of coaching in the digital intervention as a categorical covariate.ResultsIn total, 28 studies were included in this analysis. Most studies (23/28, 82%) used the reduction of HbA1c levels as the primary end point, either directly or as a part of a multicomponent outcome. In total, 21 studies reported statistically significant results with this primary end point. When stratified into 3 intervention categories by the intensity of the intervention supporting the digital health technology (analyzing all 28 studies), the success rate appeared to be proportional to the coaching intensity (ie, higher-intensity studies reported higher success rates). When the analysis was restricted to RCTs using the comparative improvement of HbA1c levels, the effectiveness of the interventions was less clear. Only half (12/23, 52%) of the included RCTs reported statistically significant results. The meta-analyses were broadly aligned with the results of the SLR. The primary analysis estimated a greater reduction in HbA1c associated with digital interventions compared with usual care (-0.31%, 95% CI -0.45% to -0.16%; P<.001). Meta-regression estimated reductions of -0.45% (95% CI -0.81% to -0.09%; P=.02), -0.29% (95% CI -0.48% to -0.11%; P=.003), and -0.28% (95% CI -0.65% to 0.09%; P=.20) associated with high-, medium-, and low-intensity interventions, respectively.ConclusionsThese findings suggest that reducing HbA1c levels in individuals with T2DM with the help of digital interventions is feasible, effective, and acceptable. One common feature of effective digital health interventions was the availability of timely and responsive personalized coaching by a dedicated health care professional.

Project description:BackgroundType 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is becoming a leading problem worldwide. Emerging reports reveal alarming evidence of increasing prevalence of T2DM that has reached pandemic levels. Despite the significant incidence, there are limited reliable data resources and comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis on the effects of yoga on people who are a prediabetic or high risk for developing T2DM.ObjectiveThe objective of this protocol is to conduct a full-scale systematic review and meta-analyses on the effects of yoga on people who are prediabetes or high risk of developing T2DM.MethodsThe articles enrolled in the study will be retrieved from the online databases between 2002 and the date the searches are executed. The searches will be repeated just before the final analyses and further relevant studies for inclusion. We will conduct a bibliographic search in databases: Medline/PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, EBSCO, and IndMED using keywords including prediabetes state, high risk for diabetes, metabolic syndrome, and yoga. A defined search strategy will be implemented along with selection criteria to obtain full-text articles of relevant studies. This study protocol was prepared according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis for Protocols 2015 guidelines. There will be no language restrictions.Ethics and disseminationThe proposed study will be based on published studies and publicly available anonymized data without directly involving human participants and therefore requires neither formal human ethical review nor approval by a human research ethics committee. We published an outline of the protocol in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) in 2018. We plan to disseminate the findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis through publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentation at relevant conference proceedings. In addition, we believe the results of the systematic review will have implications for policy and practice. We will prepare policymaker summary using a validated format, disseminate through social media and email discussion groups.Review registration numberPROSPERO registration number CRD 42018106657.

Project description:BackgroundDiabetes mellitus is a chronic burden, with a prevalence that is increasing worldwide. Telemetric interventions have attracted great interest and may provide effective new therapeutic approaches for improving type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) care.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to analyze the clinical effectiveness of telemetric interventions on glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) specifically and T2DM management generally in a systematic meta-review.MethodsA systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Web of Science Core Collection, and EMBASE databases from January 2008 to April 2020. Studies that addressed HbA1c, blood pressure, fasting blood glucose, BMI, diabetes-related and health-related quality of life, cost-effectiveness, time savings, and the clinical effectiveness of telemetric interventions were analyzed. In total, 73 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 10 systematic reviews/meta-analyses, 9 qualitative studies, 2 cohort studies, 2 nonrandomized controlled studies, 2 observational studies, and 1 noncontrolled intervention study were analyzed.ResultsOverall, 1647 citations were identified. After careful screening, 99 studies (n=15,939 patients; n=82,436 patient cases) were selected by two independent reviewers for inclusion in the review. Telemetric interventions were categorized according to communication channels to health care providers: (1) "real-time video" interventions, (2) "real-time audio" interventions, (3) "asynchronous" interventions, and (4) "combined" interventions. To analyze changes in HbA1c, suitable RCTs were pooled and the average was determined. An HbA1c decrease of -1.15% (95% CI -1.84% to -0.45%), yielding an HbA1c value of 6.95% (SD 0.495), was shown in studies using 6-month "real-time video" interventions.ConclusionsTelemetric interventions clearly improve HbA1c values in both the short term and the long term and contribute to the effective management of T2DM. More studies need to be done in greater detail.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough insulin analogues are commonly prescribed for the management of diabetes mellitus, there is uncertainty regarding their optimal use. We conducted meta-analyses to compare the outcomes of insulin analogues with conventional insulins in the treatment of type 1, type 2 and gestational diabetes.MethodsWe updated 2 earlier systematic reviews of the efficacy and safety of rapid-and long-acting insulin analogues. We searched electronic databases, conference proceedings and "grey literature" up to April 2007 to identify randomized controlled trials that compared insulin analogues with conventional insulins. Study populations of interest were people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes (adult and pediatric) and women with gestational diabetes.ResultsWe included 68 randomized controlled trials in the analysis of rapid-acting insulin analogues and 49 in the analysis of long-acting insulin analogues. Most of the studies were of short to medium duration and of low quality. In terms of hemoglobin A1c, we found minimal differences between rapid-acting insulin analogues and regular human insulin in adults with type 1 diabetes (weighted mean difference for insulin lispro: -0.09%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.16% to -0.02%; for insulin aspart: -0.13%, 95% CI -0.20% to -0.07%). We observed similar outcomes among patients with type 2 diabetes (weighted mean difference for insulin lispro: -0.03%, 95% CI -0.12% to -0.06%; for insulin aspart: -0.09%, 95% CI -0.21% to 0.04%). Differences between long-acting insulin analogues and neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin in terms of hemoglobin A1c were marginal among adults with type 1 diabetes (weighted mean difference for insulin glargine: -0.11%, 95% CI -0.21% to -0.02%; for insulin detemir: -0.06%, 95% CI -0.13% to 0.02%) and among adults with type 2 diabetes (weighted mean difference for insulin glargine: -0.05%, 95% CI -0.13% to 0.04%; for insulin detemir: 0.13%, 95% CI 0.03% to 0.22%). Benefits in terms of reduced hypoglycemia were inconsistent. There were insufficient data to determine whether insulin analogues are better than conventional insulins in reducing long-term diabetes-related complications or death.InterpretationRapid-and long-acting insulin analogues offer little benefit relative to conventional insulins in terms of glycemic control or reduced hypoglycemia. Long-term, high-quality studies are needed to determine whether insulin analogues reduce the risk of long-term complications of diabetes.

Dataset Information

Effectiveness and Safety of Ayurvedic Medicines in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Management: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets