BackgroundPrevious studies showed that supplementation of reduced form of glutathione (GSH, 500 mg/d) has a skin-lightening efficacy in humans. This study was designed to evaluate the influences of both GSH and oxidized form (GSSG), at doses lower than 500 mg/d, on improving skin properties.Patients and methodsA randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel, three-arm study was conducted. Healthy female subjects were equally randomized into three groups and took GSH (250 mg/d), GSSG (250 mg/d), or placebo orally for 12 weeks. At each visit at baseline and for 12 weeks, skin features including melanin index, wrinkles, and other relevant biophysical properties were measured. Blood samples were collected for safety monitoring.ResultsIn generalized estimating equation analyses, melanin index and ultraviolet spots of all sites including face and arm when given GSH and GSSG tended to be lower than placebo. At some sites evaluated, subjects who received GSH showed a significant reduction in wrinkles compared with those taking placebo. A tendency toward increased skin elasticity was observed in GSH and GSSG compared with placebo. There were no serious adverse effects throughout the study.ConclusionWe showed that oral glutathione, 250 mg/d, in both reduced and oxidized forms effectively influences skin properties. Overall, glutathione in both forms are well tolerated.

Background and Objectives: Self-medication with over-the-counter (OTC) medicines is becoming an increasingly popular practice around the world. The global prevalence rate of self-medication ranges from 11.2% to 93.7%, depending on the target population and country. However, there is a lack of data on the prevalence and practices of self-medication among the working-age population, particularly in Thailand metropolitan areas. The current study describes the prevalence of self-medication practices, adverse drug reactions and severity, reasons for self-medication, and basic medication knowledge among people of working age in metropolitan areas in Thailand.Methods: We conducted an online cross-sectional study between December 2020 and January 2021. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze self-medication data. A chi-square test was used to assess the association between self-medication and sociodemographic characteristics.Results: This study found high prevalence of self-medication among the working-age population in metropolitan areas of Thailand (88.2%). The most commonly used drug groups were NSAIDs (34.8%) and antibiotics (30.2%). Minor illness and easy access to pharmacies were the most common reasons for self-medication. Almost half of the participants' illnesses (42.6%) for which they self-medicated were not always completely cured, necessitating treatment at a hospital or clinic. Although only a small number of participants (ranged from 0.6 to 6.6%) experienced adverse drug reactions as a result of self-medication, some had severe symptoms that disrupted their daily lives or required hospitalization. In terms of basic medication knowledge, we discovered that study participants misunderstood some antibiotic drug concepts.Conclusions: According to the study findings, it is recommended that more information about the risks of self-medication, drug adverse reactions, antibiotic stewardship, more supervision of the prohibition of over-the-counter drugs and selling practices, and adequate facilities for peoples access to medical services be provided at the policy level.

Background Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) has gained popularity among the general population, but its acceptance and use among medical specialists have been inconclusive. This systematic review aimed to identify relevant studies and synthesize survey data on the acceptance and use of CAM among medical specialists. Methods We conducted a systematic literature search in PubMed and Scopus databases for the acceptance and use of CAM among medical specialists. Each article was assessed by two screeners. Only survey studies relevant to the acceptance and use of CAM among medical specialists were reviewed. The pooled prevalence estimates were calculated using random-effects meta-analyses. This review followed both PRISMA and SWiM guidelines. Results Of 5628 articles published between 2002 and 2017, 25 fulfilled the selection criteria. Ten medical specialties were included: Internal Medicine (11 studies), Pediatrics (6 studies), Obstetrics and Gynecology (6 studies), Anesthesiology (4 studies), Surgery (3 studies), Family Medicine (3 studies), Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (3 studies), Psychiatry and Neurology (2 studies), Otolaryngology (1 study), and Neurological Surgery (1 study). The overall acceptance of CAM was 52% (95%CI, 42–62%). Family Medicine reported the highest acceptance, followed by Psychiatry and Neurology, Neurological Surgery, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pediatrics, Anesthesiology, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Internal Medicine, and Surgery. The overall use of CAM was 45% (95% CI, 37–54%). The highest use of CAM was by the Obstetrics and Gynecology, followed by Family Medicine, Psychiatry and Neurology, Pediatrics, Otolaryngology, Anesthesiology, Internal Medicine, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, and Surgery. Based on the studies, meta-regression showed no statistically significant difference across geographic regions, economic levels of the country, or sampling methods. Conclusion Acceptance and use of CAM varied across medical specialists. CAM was accepted and used the most by Family Medicine but the least by Surgery. Findings from this systematic review could be useful for strategic harmonization of CAM and conventional medicine practice. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42019125628 Graphical abstract

During the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, several countries, including Thailand, provided two shots of CoronaVac to healthcare workers. Whereas ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 is the promising vaccine as the booster dose, the data on immunogenicity when administered after CoronaVac have been limited. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the immunogenicity of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 as the third dose vaccine in healthcare workers who previously received two shots of CoronaVac. The blood samples were obtained before the third vaccination dose, and one month and three months after vaccination. All participants were measured for humoral immunity including anti-spike IgG and neutralizing antibody by ELISA. Twenty participants were stratified by random samples based on baseline IgG status for a cellular immunity function test at three-month post-vaccination, which included T cell and B cell functions by ELISpot. This study showed significant improvement for both humoral and cellular immunity one month after vaccination. Subgroup analysis indicated a significantly higher neutralizing antibody improvement for the population with a negative anti-spike IgG at baseline. Our study suggests that, while immunity level declines at three months post-vaccination, the level was sufficiently high to protect against SARS-CoV-2.

No abstract