Sie befinden Sich nicht im Netzwerk der Universität Paderborn. Der Zugriff auf elektronische Ressourcen ist gegebenenfalls nur via VPN oder Shibboleth (DFN-AAI) möglich. mehr Informationen...
Ergebnis 6 von 61

Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte
Titel
Efficacy of a traditional Persian medicine preparation for radiation-induced xerostomia: a randomized, open-label, active-controlled trial
Ist Teil von
  • Journal of integrative medicine, 2017-05, Vol.15 (3), p.201-208
Ort / Verlag
Netherlands: Elsevier B.V
Erscheinungsjahr
2017
Link zum Volltext
Quelle
MEDLINE
Beschreibungen/Notizen
  • BACKGROUND: Xerostomia is one of the most common side effects of radiation therapy among patients with head and neck cancers (HNC). However, conventional medicine lacks an effective treatment for radiation-induced xerostomia. OBJECTIVE: Synthesizing the traditional use ofAIcea digitata and Malva sylvestris with their known beneficial effects from recent studies, we evaluated the efficacy of the herbs in the quality of life (QOL) of HNC patients with radiation-induced xerostomia. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS: This study is a randomized, double-arm, open-label active-controlled clinical trial. We evaluated the effect ofA. digitata and M. sy/vestris on QOL of HNC patients with radiation-induced xerostomia compared with Hypozalix (artificial saliva). Patients were enrolled from the Imam Hossein Hospital's oncology clinic in Shahid Beheshti University of Medica Sciences. Tehran, Iran. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measures in this trial were changes in patients' QOL assessed by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire, Head and Neck Module (EORTC QLQ-H&N 35). RESULTS: Between-group analysis showed that the intervention group patients obtained significantly lower (better) total EORTC QLQ-H&N 35 scores as compared to the control group at the end of the intervention period (P = 0.007). Mean scores of dry mouth of EORTC QLQ-H&N 35 was also significantly lower (better) in the intervention group as compared to the control group (P = 0.017).

Weiterführende Literatur

Empfehlungen zum selben Thema automatisch vorgeschlagen von bX