ARTICLE INFO | ABSTRACT | |
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW and META-ANALYSIS | Background: Diabetes mellitus is a chronic disease which affects all aspects of human life. Medical herbs have become increasingly popular as complementary therapeutic measures for patients with diabetes. Thus, the present research aims to explore the consumption of medical herbs in patients with diabetes in Eastern Mediterranean Regional Office (EMRO) countries through a meta-analysis. Methods: The following keywords were searched: medicine, medicinal plants, healing plants, medicinal herbs, use, usage, frequency of use, prevalence, diabetes patients, type 2 diabetes, adults with diabetes, and EMRO countries. The databases searched included Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Results: A total of 3,542 papers were found. After omitting repeated or irrelevant papers, 70 papers were retained. An analysis of the abstract and full text of papers led to the retention of 35 papers. A great variance was found regarding the rate of consuming medical herbs in the papers (16.8-97.7%). The relative frequency of consuming medical herbs was 38% (95% CI: 33-44). Moreover, the most prevalent herbs were fenugreek (19%), cinnamon (18%), black seed (14%), white lupinus (13%), and olive (13%) with a 95% confidence interval. About 70% of patients (95%CI: 62-79) did not inform their physician of their herbal medicine consumption. Conclusion: In light of the present findings, it can be concluded that patients with diabetes use a wide range of medical herbs. Thus, health specialists and physicians need to be aware of the possible synergic or moderating effect of herbal medicine on the therapeutic measures taken for diabetes. Keywords: Systematic review; Diabetes mellitus; Complementary therapies; Plants; Medicinal |
|
Article history: Received: 26 Dec 2022 Revised: 21 Feb 2023 Accepted:5 Mar 2023 |
||
*Corresponding author: Zareipoor_m@khoyums.ac.ir Department of Public Health, School of Health, Khoy University of Medical Sciences, Khoy, Iran Postal code: 58167-53464 Tel: +98 9141878294 |
Table 1. The quality scoring system. | |||
Dimensions | Items | Point awarded | |
Methodology |
Representative sampling strategy | Yes | 1 |
No | 0 | ||
Sample size>500 | Yes | 1 | |
No | 0 | ||
Response rate >75 % | Yes | 1 | |
No | 0 | ||
Low recall bias | Yes | 1 | |
No | 0 | ||
Participants’ characteristics |
Age | Yes | 1 |
No | 0 | ||
Inclusion of both genders | Yes | 1 | |
No | 0 | ||
Residence location | Yes | 1 | |
No | 0 | ||
Socioeconomic status | Yes | 1 | |
No | 0 | ||
Health status | Yes | 1 | |
No | 0 | ||
CM use/definition | CM use/definition | Yes | 1 |
No | 0 |
Table 2. Characteristics of the included papers. | |||||||||||
Score (0-10) |
CM definition |
Participants | Methodology | Author, year | |||||||
Health status |
Socioeconomic status |
Residence location |
Gender | Age | Low recall bias |
Response rate >75 % |
Sample size>500 |
Representative sampling method |
|||
6 | No | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | No | Yes | (Al-Garni et al., 2017) |
9 | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | (Ali and Mahfouz, 2014) |
6 | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | No | Yes | (Alqathama et al., 2020) |
4 | Yes | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | No | No | (Alsanad et al., 2018) |
7 | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | (Talaei et al., 2019) |
6 | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | No | (Boufous et al., 2017) |
7 | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | (Eddouks et al., 2002) . |
7 | Yes | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | (Jafari et al., 2021) |
5 | No | No | No | yes | yes | yes | yes | yes | No | No | (Khuttar and Jallab, 2020) |
6 | Yes | No | No | yes | yes | yes | yes | Yes | No | No | (Otoom et al., 2006) |
9 | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | NO | Yes | Yes | Yes | (El-Dahiyat et al., 2020) |
9 | yes | yes | yes | yes | yes | yes | yes | Yes | No | Yes | (Radwan et al., 2020) |
5 | Yes | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | (Al-Rowais, 2002b) |
7 | No | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | (Al Saeedi et al., 2003) |
7 | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | (Awad et al., 2008) |
5 | Yes | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | No | Yes | (Khalaf and Whitford, 2010) |
7 | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | (Ali-Shtayeh et al., 2012) |
6 | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | (Al-Kindi et al., 2011) |
7 | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | (Wazaify et al., 2011). |
9 | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | (Salih and Al-Asadi, 2012) |
6 | Yes | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | NO | Yes | (Khalil et al., 2013) |
4 | No | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | NO | (Algothamy et al., 2014) |
5 | No | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | No | NO | (Naja et al., 2014) |
6 | No | Yes | NO | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | NO | NO | (Alami et al., 2015) |
7 | Yes | Yes | NO | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | NO | NO | (Hashempur et al., 2015) |
9 | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | (Azizi-Fini et al., 2016) |
4 | No | Yes | NO | NO | Yes | Yes | Yes | NO | NO | NO | (Kamel et al., 2017) |
6 | No | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | NO | Yes | (Al-Eidi et al., 2016) |
8 | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | NO | Yes | NO | Yes | (Yousofpour et al., 2016) |
7 | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | NO | Yes | Yes | NO | (Ashur et al., 2017) |
7 | yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | NO | yes | NO | Yes | (Sheikhrabori et al., 2017) |
8 | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | yes | yes | yes | yes | NO | Yes | (Othman et al., 2013) |
6 | No | Yes | Yes | NO | yes | yes | yes | yes | NO | No | (Jawed et al., 2019) |
9 | yes | yes | yes | yes | yes | yes | yes | yes | NO | Yes | (Sabery et al., 2019). |
5 | NO | NO | NO | yes | yes | yes | NO | Yes | Yes | NO | (Jouad et al., 2001) |
8 | Yes | NO | NO | yes | yes | yes | Yes | Yes | NO | Yes | (Wazaify et al., 2013). |
Table 3. Features of the included papers in the reviews. | |||||||
Physician's awareness of usage | The main herb used | Prevalence (%) |
Mean duration |
Mean age±SD |
Sample size(RR) |
Country | Author /year |
27% | Myrrh:45%, black seed:19.3%, helteet:13.7%, , Fenugreek:13.7% 9.8aloes:11.8%,artemesia: |
17.4 | Not reported | 51.99±15.66 | 300(98.6) | Saudi Arabia | (Al-Rowais, 2002b) |
Not reported | Ammi visnaga, artemesia herba alba, fenugreek, marrubium vulgare, nigella sativa | 800 | Not reported | Not reported | 320 | Morocco | (Eddouks et al., 2002) |
Not reported | Fenugreek(6.1%),chinaberry (5.1%) rhazia strica(4.8%) |
30.1 | 5Years>287 787>5Years |
Not reported | 1039 (89.5) | Saudi Arabia | (Al Saeedi et al., 2003) . |
80% | Fenugreek (22.9%), lupinus albus (14.6%), garlic(11.5%), onion (9.8%),eucalyptus (9.4%), | 31.0 | 10.5 ± 6.9 | Not reported | 300(-) | Jordan | (Otoom et al., 2006) |
45% | Garlic (36%), bitter melon(31%) cinnamon (30%) and fenugreek (27%). |
64.0 | Not reported | Not reported | 402(63%) | Bahrain | (Khalaf and Whitford, 2010) |
32% | Fenugreek(19.6%), rosemary (13.5%),olive (13.4%), teucrium capitatum lamiaceae) (11.4%), and cinnamomum (10.8%) | 51.9 | Not reported | 79.6%>40 | 1883(-) | Palestine | (Ali-Shtayeh et al., 2012) |
13% | Harmel:10%,fenugreek:8% , black seeds and nigella sativa:6% | 79.0 | 8.48±6.5 | Not Reported |
146(100) | Oman | (Al-Kindi et al., 2011). |
15.7% | Green tea:20.5, aniseed:19.9%, ginger:18.7%,chamomile:18.1%,sage:15.6, fenugreek (10.8) | 16.6 | Not reported | Not Reported |
1000(100) | Jordan | (Wazaify et al., 2011). |
5.9% | Cinnamomum:12.4%,black seed:11.1%,garlic:6.5%,alo vera:3.9%, enugreek:3.3% | 17.3 | Not reported |
50.9±13.1 | 884(89.6) | Iraq | (Salih and Al-Asadi, 2012). |
21% | White lupine:42.9%,fenugreek:42.5% onion:34.4%,nigella sativa:7.8% |
41.7 | Not reported | Not Reported | 1100(100) | Egypt | (Khalil et al., 2013) |
Not reported | Gum arabic(louben) (71.7%),fenugreek (28.3%) of white artemisia (21.7%) and marrube (10.9%) | 23.0 | 10.5 ± 6.9 | Not Reported | 200 | Tunisia | (Othman et al., 2013). |
Not reported | Not reported | 32.1 | Not reported | Not reported | 226(93.1) | Jordan | (Wazaify et al., 2013). |
33.9% | Fenugreek (57.1%),black seed(44.6%), myrrh(42.9%), Garlic(32.1%) | 24.6 | Not reported | Not Reported | 228(86) | Saudi Arabia | (Algothamy et al., 2014). |
7% | Not reported | 37.0 | Not reported | 60.29±11.89 | 333(94.6) | Lebonon | (Naja et al., 2014) |
Fenugreek (29.1%), black seed (21.6%) cinnamon (16.8%) and olive (15.7%) |
58.0 | Not reported | 49%(41-50) | 600 | Sudan | (Ali and Mahfouz, 2014) | |
Not reported | Sage (n=62),fenugreek(n=36),olive(n=34) artemisia herba-alba(n=32), origanum compactum(n=28),rosemary (n=14) |
54.8 | 7 | 50±17 | 279 | Morocco | (Alami et al., 2015). |
Not reported | Cinnamon:50.1,ginger:30.2,fenugreek:18.8 | 97.7 | Not reported | 51.9 ±15.6 | 239 | Iran | (Hashempur et al., 2015) |
38.1% | Cinnamon:120(24.7),nettle 59 (12.2), fenugreek 48 (9.9),walnut 36 (7.5),garlic 33 (6.8), green tea 30 (6.2) chicory 29 (6.0),ginger 28 (5.9 |
54.0 | 10.24±7.10 | 56.88±10.7 | 500(87.7) | Iran | (Azizi-Fini et al., 2016). |
38.3% | black seeds (27%), myrrh (20.3%), fenugreek (15.2%), and aloe (10.8%). | 62.0 | 6.5 ± 4.6 | 51.6 ± 10.6 | 300(71.3) | Saudi Arabia | (Kamel et al., 2017). |
Not reported | Not reported |
30.4 | Not reported | 40-60 | 302(100) | Saudi Arabia | (Al-Eidi et al., 2016) |
36.4% | nettle (n=48), fenugreek(n=24), barberry(n=13), cinnamon(14), and green tea(11) | 36.6 | 9.8±7.3 | 56.2±10.1 | 270(100) | Iran | (Yousofpour et al., 2016). |
Not reported | Ginger (11.6%), black seed (10%), cinnamon (5.5%), fenugreek (2.9%), garlic (2.9%) | 25.8 | 64.8%(5-10) | 57.58±8.50 | 310(100) | Saudi Arabia | (Al-Garni et al., 2017) |
Not reported | Frankincense:19.3%,olive leaves:11.9% green tea:26.6%,onion:18.9%,garlic:16.8% |
59.9 | Not Reported | 54.43±10.03 | 523(100) | Lybia | (Ashur et al., 2017). |
Not reported | Nigellasativa, fenugreek, artemisia huguetii L., garlic | 35.9 | Not Reported | Not Reported | 358 | Morocco | (Boufous et al., 2017) |
44.2% | Chamomile(39.5%),green tea:17.74 |
88.4 | 6.38 + 4.76 | 47.87 + 11.89 | 294(100) | Iran | (Sheikhrabori et al., 2017). |
Not reported | Not reported | 48.0 | Not Reported | 51.5 + 14.8 | 400(100) | Pakistan | (Jawed et al., 2019) |
57.8% | Not reported | 70.9 | Not reported | 38.0 ± 20.6 | 421(100) | Iran | (Talaei et al., 2019) |
Not reported | Fenugreek (15.4%), sage (13.3%) and olive (10.8%). | 53.6 | 61.2%(16-30) | 334(100) | Morocco | (Skalli et al., 2019) | |
Not reported | Fenugreek | 71.6 | Not Reported |
Not Reported | 296(100) | Iran | (Sabery et al., 2019). |
49% | Olive leaf (21.2%), green tea (21.2%), cinnamon (21.2%), black seeds (15.2%), and fenugreek (15.2%). | 33.6 | 51-60(39%) 41-50(30.6%) |
98 | Saudi Arabia | (Alsanad, 2020) | |
Not Reported | Not reported | 76.2 | Not Reported | Not Reported | 500(80) | Jordan | (El-Dahiyat et al., 2020) |
29.6% | Cinnamon (23.1%), ginger (19.2%), fenugreek (9.3%) | 24.8 | 10>56.4% 1-5:21% |
46–60(51.3%) | 309(96.4) | Saudi Arabia | (Alqathama et al., 2020) |
88.1% | Not reported | 24.6 | 61.9≥year 11 38.1≥10 |
55.8±12.5 | 244(80) | United Arab Emirates | (Radwan et al., 2020) |
3.8% | Herbal tea 20 (37.7 %), cinnamon 28 (52.8 %) olive oil 6 (11.3 %), nigella sativa 10 (18.9 %), ginger 7 (13.2 %) |
53.0 | 9.61 ±6.88 | 51.04 ±16.90 | 100(100) | Iraq | (Khuttar and Jallab, 2020) |
58.6% | Not reported | 21.9 | 42.3%(6-10) | 49.08±8.03 | 1000 | Iran | (Jafari et al., 2021) |
Table 4. The most common medicinal herbs and their prevalence in EMRO countries. | ||||
Medical herb | Prevalence and range (%) |
n. of studies |
The country with the highest consuming rate | |
English name | Scientific name | |||
Fenugreek | Triognella foenum | 19(14-26) | 20 | Saudi Arabia, Iran, Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Morocco, Sudan, Palestine, Tunisia |
Black seed | Nigella sativa L. | 14(10-20) | 16 | Saudi Arabia, Libya, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Morocco, Palestine |
Cinnamon | Cinnamomum zeylanicum blume. | 18(11-27) | 14 | Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Morocco |
Ginger | Zingiber officinale rose | 12(7-20) | 8 | Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Morocco, Sudan, Palestine |
Garlic | Allium sativum L. (liliaceae) | 9(4-19) | 12 | Saudi Arabia, Iran, Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Morocco, Sudan, Palestine |
Aloe | Aloe vera (L.) Burm. f. (Xanthorrhoeaceae) | 9(3-22) | 9 | Saudi Arabia, Libya, Iraq, Morocco, Palestine, Tunisia |
lupine | Lupinus albus L. (Fabaceae) | 13(6-24) | 9 | Saudi Arabia, Libya, Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, Palestine |
Green tea | Camellia sinensis (L.) Kuntze | 10(4-20) | 10 | Saudi Arabia, Libya, Iran, Sudan, Palestine |
Olive | Olea europaea L | 13(7-23) | 10 | Saudi Arabia, Libya, Iraq, Jordan, Morocco, Iran, Palestine |
Onion | Allium ceppa | 8(3-17) | 11 | Saudi Arabia, Libya, Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, Palestine |
Sage | Salvia officianalis | 9(5-14) | 8 | Tunisia, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Palestine, Iraq |
Rights and permissions | |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |