Ukrainian
Albanian
Arabic
Armenian
Azerbaijani
Belarusian
Bengali
Bosnian
Catalan
Czech
Danish
Deutsch
Dutch
English
Estonian
Finnish
Français
Greek
Haitian Creole
Hebrew
Hindi
Hungarian
Icelandic
Indonesian
Irish
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Latvian
Lithuanian
Macedonian
Mongolian
Norwegian
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Romanian
Russian
Serbian
Slovak
Slovenian
Spanish
Swahili
Swedish
Turkish
Ukrainian
Vietnamese
Български
中文(简体)
中文(繁體)
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2015-Apr

Feverfew for preventing migraine.

Тільки зареєстровані користувачі можуть перекладати статті
Увійти Зареєструватися
Посилання зберігається в буфері обміну
Barbara Wider
Max H Pittler
Edzard Ernst

Ключові слова

Анотація

BACKGROUND

This review is an update of a previously published review in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews on 'Feverfew for preventing migraine' (2004, Issue 1). Feverfew (Tanacetum parthenium L.) extract is a herbal remedy, which has been used for preventing attacks of migraine.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the evidence from double-blind randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the clinical efficacy and safety of feverfew monopreparations versus placebo for preventing migraine.

METHODS

For this updated version of the review we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and AMED to January 2015. We contacted manufacturers of feverfew and checked the bibliographies of identified articles for further trials.

METHODS

We included randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind trials assessing the efficacy of feverfew monopreparations for preventing migraine in patients of any age. We included trials using clinical outcome measures, while we excluded trials focusing exclusively on physiological parameters. There were no restrictions regarding the language of publication.

METHODS

We systematically extracted data on patients, interventions, methods, outcome measures, results and adverse events. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool and evaluated methodological quality using the Oxford Quality Scale developed by Jadad and colleagues. Two review authors (BW and MHP for this update, MHP and EE for the original version) independently selected studies, assessed methodological quality and extracted data. We resolved disagreements concerning evaluation of individual trials through discussion.

RESULTS

We identified one new study for this update, resulting in six trials (561 patients) meeting the inclusion criteria. Five of the six trials reported on the main outcome, migraine frequency. Although five of the trials were generally of good methodological quality, all studies were either of unclear or high risk of bias with regards to sample size. Pooled analysis of the results was not possible due to the lack of common outcome measures and heterogeneity between studies in terms of participants, interventions and designs.The most recent trial added to this version of the review is rigorous and larger (n = 218), using a stable feverfew extract at a dose determined by a previous dose-finding trial. It reports that feverfew reduced migraine frequency by 1.9 attacks from 4.8 to 2.9 and placebo by 1.3 from to 4.8 to 3.5 per month, resulting in a difference in effect between feverfew and placebo of 0.6 attacks per month. For the secondary outcome measures intensity and duration of migraine attacks, incidence and severity of nausea and vomiting, and global assessment no statistically significant differences were reported. Results of previous trials are not convincing: three trials reporting positive effects of feverfew are all of small sample size (17 to 60 participants), while two rigorous trials (n = 50, 147) did not find significant differences between feverfew and placebo. Only mild and transient adverse events, most commonly gastrointestinal complaints and mouth ulcers, were reported in the included trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Since the last version of this review, one larger rigorous study has been included, reporting a difference in effect between feverfew and placebo of 0.6 attacks per month. This adds some positive evidence to the mixed and inconclusive findings of the previous review. However, this constitutes low quality evidence, which needs to be confirmed in larger rigorous trials with stable feverfew extracts and clearly defined migraine populations before firm conclusions can be drawn. It appears from the data reviewed that feverfew is not associated with any major safety concerns.

Приєднуйтесь до нашої
сторінки у Facebook

Найповніша база даних про лікарські трави, підкріплена наукою

  • Працює 55 мовами
  • Лікування травами за підтримки науки
  • Розпізнавання трав за зображенням
  • Інтерактивна GPS-карта - позначайте трави на місці (скоро)
  • Читайте наукові публікації, пов’язані з вашим пошуком
  • Шукайте лікарські трави за їх впливом
  • Організуйте свої інтереси та будьте в курсі новинних досліджень, клінічних випробувань та патентів

Введіть симптом або хворобу та прочитайте про трави, які можуть допомогти, наберіть траву та ознайомтесь із захворюваннями та симптомами, проти яких вона застосовується.
* Вся інформація базується на опублікованих наукових дослідженнях

Google Play badgeApp Store badge