Rachael Frost, Sayem Uddin, Silvy Mathew, Verity Thomas, Adriana Salame, Sukvinder Kaur Bhamra, Juan Carlos Bazo-Alvarez, Cini Bhanu, Michael Heinrich, Kate Walters
{"title":"What over the counter (OTC) products have been evaluated for anxiety in adults aged 18-60? A scoping review.","authors":"Rachael Frost, Sayem Uddin, Silvy Mathew, Verity Thomas, Adriana Salame, Sukvinder Kaur Bhamra, Juan Carlos Bazo-Alvarez, Cini Bhanu, Michael Heinrich, Kate Walters","doi":"10.1080/09638237.2024.2408231","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Anxiety symptoms and disorders are common in the UK. Whilst waiting for, or alongside, treatments such as anxiolytics or psychological therapies, people often self-manage anxiety symptoms with products purchased over-the-counter (OTC), such as herbal medicines or dietary supplements. However, the evidence for these products is often presented across different reviews and is not easy for patients or healthcare professionals to compare and understand.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To determine the nature and size of the evidence base available for these products.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A scoping review. CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo, and AMED (inception-Dec 2022) were searched for RCTs assessing OTC products in people aged 18-60 with symptoms or a diagnosis of anxiety.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total 69 papers assessing a range of products were found, which mostly focussed on kava, lavender, saffron, probiotics, Galphimia glauca and valerian. Studies used varying dosages. Compared to herbal medicine studies, there were much fewer dietary supplement studies and homeopathic remedy studies, despite some of use of these by the general public.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Future research needs to investigate commonly used but less evaluated products (e.g. chamomile, St John's Wort) and to evaluate products against or alongside conventional treatments to better reflect patient decision making.</p>","PeriodicalId":48135,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Mental Health","volume":" ","pages":"1-21"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Mental Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09638237.2024.2408231","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Anxiety symptoms and disorders are common in the UK. Whilst waiting for, or alongside, treatments such as anxiolytics or psychological therapies, people often self-manage anxiety symptoms with products purchased over-the-counter (OTC), such as herbal medicines or dietary supplements. However, the evidence for these products is often presented across different reviews and is not easy for patients or healthcare professionals to compare and understand.
Aims: To determine the nature and size of the evidence base available for these products.
Methods: A scoping review. CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo, and AMED (inception-Dec 2022) were searched for RCTs assessing OTC products in people aged 18-60 with symptoms or a diagnosis of anxiety.
Results: In total 69 papers assessing a range of products were found, which mostly focussed on kava, lavender, saffron, probiotics, Galphimia glauca and valerian. Studies used varying dosages. Compared to herbal medicine studies, there were much fewer dietary supplement studies and homeopathic remedy studies, despite some of use of these by the general public.
Conclusion: Future research needs to investigate commonly used but less evaluated products (e.g. chamomile, St John's Wort) and to evaluate products against or alongside conventional treatments to better reflect patient decision making.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Mental Health is an international forum for the latest research in the mental health field. Reaching over 65 countries, the journal reports on the best in evidence-based practice around the world and provides a channel of communication between the many disciplines involved in mental health research and practice. The journal encourages multi-disciplinary research and welcomes contributions that have involved the users of mental health services. The international editorial team are committed to seeking out excellent work from a range of sources and theoretical perspectives. The journal not only reflects current good practice but also aims to influence policy by reporting on innovations that challenge traditional ways of working.