Cupping therapy is an ancient traditional and complementary medicine practice. Recently, there is growing evidence of its potential benefits in the treatment of pain-related diseases. This article gives an overview of cupping therapy practice. Furthermore, this article suggests a new classification of cupping therapy sets, a new classification of cupping therapy adverse events, and an updated classification of cupping therapy types.

Herbal medicines and dietary supplements are commonly taken by patients with cancer, leading to concern over interactions with conventional medicines. A literature search was carried out to identify published studies exploring supplement use by patients with a cancer diagnosis. A total of 818 articles were retrieved using the key words, but only 41 are judged to be relevant based on title. Following the review of the abstracts, ten papers were considered to be potentially relevant, but of these, only two met the selection criteria, and three additional papers were identified from published reviews. Of 806 patients surveyed, 433 (53.7%) were reported to be taking combinations of supplements and drugs, and 167 incidents of risk were identified, affecting 60 patients (13.9%). The interactions identified were mainly theoretical and not supported by clinical data. No studies reported any adverse events associated with these combinations; most did not record the actual drug combinations taken, and the risk potential of some supplements appears to have been over-estimated. More effort should be made to investigate supplement use in this vulnerable patient group, based on sound evidence of plausible interaction, not only to avoid harm but also to provide reassurance where appropriate if the patient wishes to take a particular supplement.

BackgroundHerb/Dietary Supplements (HDS) are the most popular Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) modality used by cancer patients and the only type which involves the ingestion of substances which may interfere with the efficacy and safety of conventional medicines. This study aimed to assess the level of use of HDS in cancer patients undergoing treatment in the UK, and their perceptions of their effects, using 127 case histories of patients who were taking HDS. Previous studies have evaluated the risks of interactions between HDS and conventional drugs on the basis on numbers of patient using HDSs, so our study aimed to further this exploration by examining the actual drug combinations taken by individual patients and their potential safety.MethodThree hundred seventy-five cancer patients attending oncology departments and centres of palliative care at the Oxford University Hospitals Trust (OUH), Duchess of Kent House, Sobell House, and Nettlebed Hospice participated in a self-administered questionnaire survey about their HDS use with their prescribed medicines. The classification system of Stockley’s Herbal Medicine’s Interactions was adopted to assess the potential risk of herb-drug interactions for these patients.Results127/375 (34 %; 95 % CI 29, 39) consumed HDS, amounting to 101 different products. Most combinations were assessed as ‘no interaction’, 22 combinations were categorised as ‘doubt about outcomes of use’, 6 combinations as ‘Potentially hazardous outcome’, one combination as an interaction with ‘Significant hazard’, and one combination as an interaction of “Life-threatening outcome”. Most patients did not report any adverse events.ConclusionMost of the patients sampled were not exposed to any significant risk of harm from interactions with conventional medicines, but it is not possible as yet to conclude that risks in general are over-estimated. The incidence of HDS use was also less than anticipated, and significantly less than reported in other areas, illustrating the problems when extrapolating results from one region (the UK), in one setting (NHS oncology) in where patterns of supplement use may be very different to those elsewhere.

Diabetes mellitus represents a major burden in Saudi Arabia where seven million (20% of population) are living with diabetes. This article reviews the literature on usage of traditional and complementary medicine (T&CM) therapies among Saudi diabetic patients, focusing in particular on identifying the prevalence as well as discussing their safety and efficacy. Three databases (PubMed, Cochrane, and ScienceDirect) were searched prior to December 10, 2017, for articles published in peer-reviewed journals that reported primary data on the use of traditional and complementary medicine therapies among diabetic patients in Saudi Arabia. Six studies were selected according to the inclusion/exclusion criteria. In conclusion, the prevalence of use of T&CM therapies among diabetics in Saudi Arabia was 32.18%. This review identified that the most used T&CM therapy among diabetics was herbal treatment. The most used herbs were fenugreek, black seeds, neem, myrrh, helteet, harmel, and aloes. There is insufficient or little evidence to support the efficacy of the most identified herbs and therapies. This review is raising the safety concerns about the used herbs and complementary therapies which were commonly used without any medical consultation.