Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.) · 2012
Safety survey of intranasal glutathione.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Mischley Laurie K, Vespignani Marco F, Finnell John S
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Glutathione depletion has been documented in several disease states, and exogenous administration has been hypothesized to have therapeutic potential for some conditions. In an effort to reach target tissues of the sinuses and central nervous system (CNS), glutathione is being prescribed as an intranasal spray, although no literature exists to support this mode of administration. The objective of this study was to describe patient-reported outcomes in a population of individuals who have been prescribed intranasal reduced glutathione, (in)GSH.
METHODS: A survey was designed to assess individuals' perception of tolerability, adverse events, and health benefits associated with (in)GSH use. Using a pharmacy database, 300 individuals were randomly selected to receive a survey; any individual who had received one or more prescriptions for (in)GSH between March 2009 and March 2011 was eligible for participation.
RESULTS: Seventy (70) individuals returned the survey (23.3% response rate) from 20 different states. Reported indications for (in)GSH prescriptions were multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS) (n=29), allergies/sinusitis (n=25), Parkinson disease (PD) (n=7), Lyme disease (n=3), fatigue (n=2), and other (n=10). Of the respondents, 78.8% (n=52) reported an overall positive experience with (in)GSH, 12.1% (n=8) reported having experienced adverse effects, and 62.1% (n=41) reported having experienced health benefits attributable to (in)GSH use. Over 86% of respondents considered the nasal spray to be comfortable and easy to administer.
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to evaluate patient-reported outcomes among individuals across the country who have been prescribed (in)GSH. The majority of survey respondents considered (in)GSH to be effective and without significant adverse effects. (in)GSH should be further evaluated as a method of treating respiratory and CNS diseases where free-radical burden is a suspected contributor to disease progression.
METHODS: A survey was designed to assess individuals' perception of tolerability, adverse events, and health benefits associated with (in)GSH use. Using a pharmacy database, 300 individuals were randomly selected to receive a survey; any individual who had received one or more prescriptions for (in)GSH between March 2009 and March 2011 was eligible for participation.
RESULTS: Seventy (70) individuals returned the survey (23.3% response rate) from 20 different states. Reported indications for (in)GSH prescriptions were multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS) (n=29), allergies/sinusitis (n=25), Parkinson disease (PD) (n=7), Lyme disease (n=3), fatigue (n=2), and other (n=10). Of the respondents, 78.8% (n=52) reported an overall positive experience with (in)GSH, 12.1% (n=8) reported having experienced adverse effects, and 62.1% (n=41) reported having experienced health benefits attributable to (in)GSH use. Over 86% of respondents considered the nasal spray to be comfortable and easy to administer.
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to evaluate patient-reported outcomes among individuals across the country who have been prescribed (in)GSH. The majority of survey respondents considered (in)GSH to be effective and without significant adverse effects. (in)GSH should be further evaluated as a method of treating respiratory and CNS diseases where free-radical burden is a suspected contributor to disease progression.