4.7 Article

The Indispensable Value of Clinical Trials in the Modernization of Traditional Chinese Medicine: 12 Years' Experience at CUHK and Future Perspectives

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CHINESE MEDICINE
Volume 42, Issue 3, Pages 587-604

Publisher

WORLD SCIENTIFIC PUBL CO PTE LTD
DOI: 10.1142/S0192415X14500384

Keywords

Traditional Chinese Medicine; Clinical Trial; Diabetic Foot Ulcer; Allergic Dermatitis; Rhinitis; Asthma; Respiratory Viral Infection; Immunomodulation; Coronary Artery Disease; Osteoporosis; Review

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The last decade has seen a wealth of information reporting the beneficial effects of Chinese herbal medicines. While a lot more studies were done using in vitro and in vivo research platforms, much fewer investigations were conducted according to evidence-based requirements in clinical settings. The Institute of Chinese Medicine at the Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK) has had the opportunity to collaborate with clinicians over the years to initiate and conduct dozens of clinical trials investigating and verifying the therapeutic values of Chinese herbs in selected disease conditions. Of the many disorders, we chose to focus on those that are known for their difficulties achieving perfect results with conventional treatment methods. Examples include non-healing ulcers, allergic conditions, degenerative diseases and cancer. Protective effects of the herbs in such chronic diseases as coronary artery disease and osteoporosis were also part of our focus. Even in healthy individuals and those recovering from chemotherapy, Chinese herbs could help with the immune system and were studied in our clinical trials as well. This paper aims to highlight the important findings from these clinical studies while at the same time, stressing the indispensable value of clinical trials in modernizing the use of Chinese herbs in present-day medicine.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available