1. Introduction
Botanicals find applications in a diverse array of products, including edibles, beverages such as teas and juices, as well as dietary supplements, herbal medicinal products, homeopathic products, cosmetics, etc. [1]. Over the last thirty years, there has been a significant increase in the consumption of herbal medicinal products and supplements [1,2]. As the worldwide consumption of herbal medicinal products keeps expanding, there is a growing acknowledgment of public health and safety concerns associated with them [3,4]. Many people use herbal medicines simultaneously with existing medications, believing that remedies of natural origin are safe. This could also be because most herbal medicines can be purchased worldwide without a prescription. Most herbal medicines are harmless in small doses. Plants have diverse chemical compositions and versatile pharmacological actions. They can interact with other medications and cause considerable health problems. Unfortunately, doctors and consumers do not always have the information to draw convincing conclusions about the interaction between herbal and prescribed medicines.
In many parts of the world, the risk of an interaction between medicines and herbal preparations increases every year. The concomitant use of both herbal preparations and medicines also increases the risk to patient health, leading to various side effects and risks of interactions [5,6]. Ineffective medical treatments increase the probability that the patient will enter the hospital during a disease flare-up. Researchers emphasize that various medications may have a negative effect on enzymes involved in drug metabolism [7]. Although considered natural, most herbal medicines can interact with other drugs, causing potentially harmful side effects or leading to loss of or decreased therapeutic benefits of the drugs. As a result, a person may have a false impression that drugs are ineffective or only slightly effective, thus negatively influencing the patient regarding the medication already prescribed. It should be noted that the information available from scientific sources and various international sources shows that additional attention should be given to the safety of different groups of medicinal products, with a focus on the groups at increased risk of drug interaction [2]. Taking into account the growing popularity of herbal medicines, there is an increased risk of clinical complications in groups of chronic disease patients [6,8]. Herbal products are the primary form of treatment, particularly among the elderly population who are also taking multiple prescription medications to manage their concurrent conditions. Consequently, this elevates the potential for adverse interactions between herbs, drugs, and diseases [6,9]. According to reports, not all risks associated with interactions between active herbal substances and conventional medications have been completely identified. Nevertheless, it is crucial to focus on those interactions for which reliable information is available [10].
The aim of this study was to investigate the experience of the use of herbal medicines and preparations and the risks of interactions between plants and conventional medicines among Latvian citizens. It is important to identify the attitudes of the respondents towards the safety of herbal medicines and products, and it is crucial to ascertain the respondents’ perspectives on whether they believe it is necessary to inform a pharmacist or physician about their use of herbal medicines and products while undergoing conventional drug treatment. The perception that naturally derived remedies are generally safe could lead to a reduced likelihood of patients disclosing their use of all herbal medicinal products to healthcare professionals. Hence, it becomes essential to have discussions about potential health hazards related to the simultaneous use of prescription and over-the-counter medications.
2. Materials and Methods
The methodology of this study was based on the completion of a structured questionnaire designed for visitors to community pharmacies who voluntarily agreed to participate. The survey included 504 consecutive respondents older than 18 years. Following the conventions of social studies, this methodology ensured a 3% margin of error with a confidence level of 5%. The survey was carried out from December 2019 to November 2021 in Latvian cities (Riga, Daugavpils, Ventspils, Liepaja, and Jelgava) and towns (Talsi and Ludza). The structured interviews using the questionnaire were carried out by pharmacy assistants from Rīga Stradiņš University, Red Cross Medical College. Participants had the opportunity to ask for advice concerning the questions included in the questionnaire if necessary. The questionnaire was approved by the Faculty of Pharmaceuticals of RSU Red Cross Medical College, Latvia (Supplementary Materials S1).
The interviews were conducted in an isolated section in the sales area at community pharmacies. The questionnaire consisted of 4 parts and 15 mainly multiple-choice and Likert scale questions. Sociodemographic data such as age, sex, place of residence, and educational level of participants were collected in the first part. The second part was related to diseases. Information about the medicines used was collected in the third part. In the fourth part of the questionnaire, participants provided information on the medicinal plants they used. Respondents were requested to provide information regarding their experiences in utilizing herbs and drugs over the course of the previous year.
The potential interactions between prescription, over-the-counter drug, and herbal medicinal product combinations were assessed using the Drugs.com Interaction Checker (
This study was approved by the Red Cross Medical College of Riga Stradiņš University Ethics Committee (Approval number: 31; Supplementary Materials S2). To ensure the anonymity of the participants involved in the questionnaire, the authors implemented rigorous data privacy measures. These included de-identification of data, using only aggregate data in reporting, ensuring the confidentiality of personal information at every stage, and obtaining informed consent from the participants. Additionally, any identifying information was securely stored and accessed only by the research team.
Although the data collection method used self-reported responses, potential errors associated with memory recall and social desirability bias were minimized by involving pharmacy assistants. These assistants assisted participants in remembering specific drug names by displaying the corresponding medication boxes available in the pharmacy.
With regard to the survey being conducted by pharmacy assistants, and due to the fact that their professional background and training may influence the data collected a standardized questionnaire was used to reduce potential bias and all pharmacy assistants received extensive training prior to the survey on how to accurately and objectively collect data.
All data were verified by the leading researcher and double-checked by another experienced researcher/pharmacist.
Data were statistically evaluated using Microsoft Office Excel 2016 (Version 16.0; sourced from Microsoft Corporation, located in Redmond, Washington, USA). Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the characteristics of a data set. Measures of mean, central tendency, and frequency distribution describing the occurrence of data within the data set (count) were calculated.
3. Results
3.1. Demographics
During the survey period, a total of 504 respondents were interviewed. Of these respondents, 380 (75.4%) were female and 124 (24.6%) were male. The survey showed that the age distribution of the respondents was approximately evenly distributed. Most of them belonged to age groups of 40–49, 30–39, and 50–59 years. The smallest number of responders was in the age groups of 80–95 (n = 18, 3.6%). Most of the participants had secondary school (47.2%) and high school (46.8%) education, and a minority of responders obtained only basic education, mainly in the oldest age category. Out of all the respondents, there was only one individual who held a Ph.D. degree. More than half of the respondents (297; 58.9%) lived in the city (Table 1).
3.2. The Use of Herbal Medicines and Herbal Dietary Supplements and Their Recommended Sources
The respondents were queried about their daily usage of herbal preparations, which encompassed various forms such as teas, oils, tinctures, extracts, tablets, capsules, or syrups. Most respondents (n = 392, 77.8%) replied that they used herbal preparations as needed or during the disease course. Sixty-three (12.5%) respondents regularly used herbal preparations, while only 49 (9.7%) did not use herbal preparations daily. The majority of the participants (n = 239, 47.4%) took herbal medicines on the advice of a pharmacist, 217 (43.1%) took them on their own initiative, and 177 (35.1%) relied on the advice of their physician, while the recommendations of advertisements or a person without a medical background (for example, family, friends, and others) had less influence on their decisions (Figure 1).
3.3. Attitudes towards the Safety of Herbal Medicines
Out of the respondents, a significant portion (n = 193, 38.3%) perceived the use of herbal medicines as safe and without harm. However, 174 individuals (34.5%) expressed the belief that their usage was not entirely safe and could potentially lead to adverse effects, including allergies. More than a quarter of the respondents (n = 115, 22.8%) believed that the combination of herbal and conventional medicines was not safe and may affect the effects and efficacy of other medications. The remaining respondents (n = 22, 4.4%) reported that the safety of the medicines was not important to them.
3.4. Medicinal Plants Used among Individuals Who Used Herbal Products
Two-thirds of the respondents regularly used peppermint, coffee, chamomile, garlic, cranberry, lime tree flowers, green tea, onion, and ginger on a daily basis. The most commonly used plants are shown in Figure 2. In almost all age groups, the dominant herbal medicines were the same: peppermint, coffee, chamomile, garlic, and cranberry.
3.5. Respondents’ Health Concerns and Interest in Medication Side Effects
According to the survey findings, 46.2% of the respondents indicated that they were rarely or very rarely concerned about potential side effects when starting a new medicine, dietary supplement, or herbal preparation. A total of 4.4% of the respondents were never interested in side effects, while only 3 respondents were always interested (0.6%). A total of 48.8% of the respondents were often or very often interested in side effects.
During the survey, 56.2% of the respondents (n = 283) reported experiencing a long-term illness or chronic health condition within the past year. According to the data collected, musculoskeletal disorders, such as back pain, were common among the respondents (Table 2). High blood pressure, allergies, depression and anxiety, high blood cholesterol and fats, and gastric or peptic ulcer disease were also very common among respondents. Most respondents (n = 196, 38.9%) indicated that they had two chronic diseases, 27 (5.4%) indicated that they had three, and 24 (4.8%) had four chronic diseases. Three (0.6%) respondents indicated that they had experienced 7–8 chronic diseases or conditions in the last year.
Elderly patients exhibit a higher incidence of chronic diseases (R2 = 0.9426) and experience adverse effects more frequently (R2 = 0.6954). However, the correlation between the age of the user and the use of herbal medicine was not as strong. The determination coefficient (R2 = 0.5452) indicates that only 54.52% of cases for plant users were associated with age (Figure 3).
Most respondents (n = 217, 43.1%) reported that they had not had an acute disease in the last year. Most respondents had one (n = 138, 27.4%), two (n = 73, 14.5%), or three (n = 25, 5.0%) acute diseases. More than four acute diseases in the last year were reported by 16 (3.2%) respondents, and 35 (7.0%) respondents did not remember the exact number. Regarding acute conditions, almost half (48.4%) of the respondents used prescription drugs prescribed by a doctor.
A total of 29.4% of all respondents used four to ten prescription and over-the-counter drugs daily. A total of 16.1% of all respondents took three prescription and over-the-counter drugs, 22.2% took two, 16.5% took one, and 15.9% did not take any medication. Despite having a higher incidence of chronic disease (R2 = 0.9426) and using more active compounds simultaneously, as well as experiencing adverse effects more frequently, our study results indicate that the consumption of herbal products was not necessarily higher among elderly patients (Figure 4).
A total of 70.0% of the respondents did not notice any side effects caused by the drugs or their interactions. Thirty percent of the respondents had experienced side effects of the medicines.
3.6. Potential Clinically Significant Interactions between Herbal Medicines and Conventional Drugs
The existence of interactions between herbal products and conventional drugs is evident, and some of these interactions have been well characterized and documented. In an examination of the potential interactions of the most common prescription and over-the-counter drugs used by the respondents with herbal medicines, the interactions of 66 active substances with 18 different plant species were identified (Table 3). The interactions may lead to clinically significant adverse reactions, such as serious, moderate, or minor reactions. The interactions of moderate significance have mostly been identified, which means that the combination of prescription and over-the-counter drugs with certain herbal medicines should usually be used with caution, avoided, or could be used only under special circumstances. Thirty-five combinations were classified as ‘serious’ and were characterized as highly clinically significant. This means that a combination should be avoided, or an alternative drug should be used. The herbal medicines implicated in the potential risk of serious interactions included grapefruit, St. John’s wort, and valerian. Most of the identified interactions involved potential alterations in the plasma concentration or effect of drugs, including nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), diuretics, beta-blockers, HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins), calcium channel blockers, paracetamol, and angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors. Most herb–drug interactions are estimated to cause potential adverse outcomes associated with a higher risk of bleeding (or thrombosis), reduced efficacy, or changes in the bioavailability of the drug.
4. Discussion
In Latvia, the traditions of using plants to resolve various health problems are very old and are also widely described in folklore [47]. Most of the respondents in this study used medicinal plants in different dosages, and only a small number did not use herbal preparations daily. The regular utilization of medicinal plants, coupled with the observation that most participants perceive herbal medicines as safe, indicates a higher likelihood of adverse interactions between drugs and herbs. High levels of consumption of and self-medication with herbs have been reported in many other studies [2,48,49,50]. The respondents started using various herbal preparations mainly on the recommendation of a pharmacist. Although pharmacists, unlike doctors, do not have complete information on the medications used by a pharmacy visitor to warn about adverse effects in the use of herbal products and conventional drugs, these data show that the pharmacist plays an important role in correctly advising on the safe and effective use of medicines. Pharmacists are strongly advised to inquire directly with their patients about any herbal products they may be using prior to dispensing conventional drugs. A large number of respondents also reported that they began using herbal preparations on their own initiative. This situation can present the greatest risk. In other studies conducted in European countries as well as in Canada, a significant proportion of surveyed individuals used herbal remedies either independently or based on suggestions from non-medically trained individuals, without previous consultation with a health care professional [51,52,53,54]. The substantial rate of self-medication, coupled with the fact that users fail to inform their doctor or pharmacist about the herbal medicines they are using independently, represents a significant concern that has been extensively addressed in the literature but is not frequently discussed in practical settings. The fact that over-the-counter (OTC) medicines and food supplements are available without a prescription does not mean that they are safe to use, especially in combination with prescribed medication. Therefore, patients must be constantly advised by health care professionals. Due to the fact that the majority of respondents in Latvia use herbal products, several implications for the healthcare system could be discussed, including the need for better regulation and monitoring of herbal products, as well as improved education for both healthcare professionals and consumers regarding the safe use of these remedies.
In Latvia, the general practitioner has access to the patient’s medical record, which contains information about their past use of prescription and OTC medications. This access to the medication record holds particular significance for elderly patients since side effects and potential drug interactions are frequently observed in this age group. A study by Qato et al. [55] reveals that approximately 50% of users engage in concurrent usage of over-the-counter (OTC) medications and dietary supplements. Among this group, it has been observed that roughly 2% of individuals exhibit potential major interactions between OTC medications and dietary supplements. González-Stuart [56] addressed the issue highlighting that older patients tend to withhold information from their healthcare providers regarding their use of herbal products. Consequently, this lack of disclosure limits the identification of potential interactions and health effects that may arise from the combination of conventional treatments and herbal products. It should be noted that in Latvia there is no information on the concomitant use of OTC and herbal products.
A large percentage of the respondents reported having at least two long-term diseases or chronic health conditions. Among them, back pain was frequently reported, which is usually treated with analgesics, as well as increased blood pressure, which is treated with multiple classes of antihypertensive medications such as beta-blockers, ACE inhibitors, or calcium channel blockers. When studying the literature on the interactions between herbal and conventional medicines, undesirable interactions between herbal medicines and analgesics and antihypertensive medications often appear [26,57]. Healthcare providers in Latvia should be mindful of potential interactions between herbal and conventional medicines used to treat back pain or hypertension. This awareness prompts them to inquire about patients’ use of herbal products, enabling better patient management and the development of individualized treatment plans. By acknowledging and addressing potential interactions, healthcare providers can minimize the associated risks and ensure optimal patient care.
Two-thirds of the Latvian respondents regularly used peppermint, coffee, chamomile, garlic, cranberry, lime tree flowers, green tea, onion, and ginger on a daily basis. Surprisingly, there was no notable variation in the reported usage of herbs across different age groups. When these data on the most commonly used plants are compared with those of other European countries, there are many differences. Some countries also report garlic, cranberries, chamomile, and lime tree flowers as the most commonly used plants; however, other often used plants include ginkgo, valerian, evening primrose, aloe, and artichoke [1,37,51,52].
The use of herbal medicine is influenced by various factors, and its correlation with incidence does not solely depend on the frequency of plant use. Notably, in the present study, the groups reporting adverse effects did not align with those who used herbal medicine the most. The utilization of plants may be influenced not only by age but also by cultural, social, and economic factors. To gain deeper insights into these aspects, future studies could incorporate more in-depth interviews for analysis.
Herbal medicine, like any form of medical treatment, can have both benefits and risks. While herbal remedies have been used for centuries and are often considered natural and safe, they can also pose significant complications, particularly when used improperly or without appropriate guidance. Some of the main complications associated with herbal medicine include toxicity, adverse reactions, and potential drug interactions, leading to reduced effectiveness or dangerous side effects when combined with medications. Allergic reactions, misidentification, and contamination of herbal products are also concerns, along with delayed treatment or misdiagnosis when relying solely on herbs [2,58,59]. The lack of scientific evidence further adds to the risks. It is important to note that herbal products are not risk-free, and the risk of drug interactions has not been sufficiently studied, so more research is needed in this field, and healthcare professionals should advise patients to take precautions. In general, patients should consult with a healthcare provider before taking any herbal medicine. People’s knowledge of the use of plants and their preparations is incomplete and can cause health risks; therefore, in the present study, the authors were able to assess whether there were undesirable risks between over-the-counter and prescription and herbal medicines used by the respondents.
Although there were mainly minor or moderate interactions between the most commonly used herbal medicines and the conventional drugs reported by the respondents, this indicates a potential risk of adverse events. Although the majority of interactions may only have minor clinical implications, certain interactions could present a serious threat to public health. It is very important to pay attention to the rarer cases identified in the survey, which have much more serious consequences, such as the use of St. John’s wort, valerian, and grapefruit. These cases should definitely be reported by patients to healthcare professionals. Herbal medicines like St. John’s wort can significantly impact the enzymatic activity of liver cytochromes, potentially affecting the efficacy of prescription medicines and leading to treatment failure. Moreover, when St. John’s wort is combined with anti-depressants, it may trigger serotonin syndrome, an adverse drug reaction that can be life-threatening [4,9]. Regarding grapefruit, even though grapefruit juice is not consumed for medicinal purposes, its components can inhibit the CYP3A4 enzyme in the small intestine. This inhibition leads to elevated blood levels of CYP3A4 substrate drugs, such as calcium channel blockers, statins, antidepressants, and estrogen. The increased drug levels can potentially result in dangerous hypotension, myopathy, liver toxicity, or even an increased risk of breast cancer. Hence, the interaction between grapefruit juice and certain medications can be risky and should be taken seriously [9,60]. In contrast, valerian does not affect several CYP isoenzymes, including CYP3A4, CYP2D6, CYP2E1, and CYP1A2 [61]. Valerian root preparations are widely used as a sleep aid, and concomitant use could enhance the effect of CNS depressants [62].
Concerning the limitations and scope of this study, it is worth noting that although the sample size was adequate and represented the population in Latvia, the number of participants in each age group could have been more similar. Due to the lack of access to the respondents’ history of medication use, and the information on the use of drugs and herbal products was provided solely by the respondents themselves, there is a possibility that the accuracy and reliability of the data may be affected. The results could be influenced by recall bias, social desirability bias, and subjective interpretations of respondents. However, during the survey, pharmacist assistants were available to explain any unclear aspects to respondents or help clarify the correct names of the drugs. Additionally, it is important to acknowledge that the study was conducted solely within the boundaries of Latvia, and the findings may not be directly applicable to other populations or regions with different healthcare systems or cultural contexts. In addition, it is worth noting the potential impact of COVID-19 on the results since data collection occurred during the pandemic. One might question whether it affected the frequency and manner of natural product use among Latvian citizens. However, it is not pertinent to discuss the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic in this particular manuscript. This is primarily due to the fact that the bulk of the data was gathered in 2020, a time when no COVID-19-related restrictions were in place in Latvia. Furthermore, respondents were asked to report on medications and herbs used in the previous year, which refers to 2019, a period prior to the pandemic.
The purpose of the present study was to show the current situation and raise awareness of this subject in Latvian society and the existing risks of concomitant use of herbal and conventional medicines among pharmacists and physicians, thus protecting the health of consumers. Patients may use herbal medicines concurrently with conventional drugs, leading to the possibility of potentially serious adverse events. It is the responsibility of healthcare professionals to stay well-informed about the increasing clinical evidence of interactions between herbs and drugs. By being knowledgeable about these interactions, healthcare professionals can better assess and manage the risks associated with the combined use of herbal medicines and conventional drugs, ensuring the safety and well-being of their patients.
5. Conclusions
Survey respondents who took herbal medicines, especially those containing garlic, grapefruit, St. John’s wort, valerian, and others that affected the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of over-the-counter and prescribed medications, were at risk of experiencing different degrees of herb–drug interactions. Therefore, patients should always be advised by a healthcare professional. Considering the current pharmaceutical policy in Latvia, enhancing the quality of guidance can be achieved by granting both physicians and pharmacists access to the general medical record, which contains the history of a patient’s usage of prescription and over-the-counter drugs. Having this comprehensive information readily available will enable healthcare professionals to make more informed decisions, provide better care, and effectively address potential interactions or adverse effects that may arise from the combined use of herbal medicines and conventional drugs. Healthcare professionals should also be educated on where to look for information on possible drug interactions.
Conceptualization, E.A., R.T. and I.S.; methodology, all authors; investigation, E.A., R.T. and I.S.; data curation, E.A., R.T., O.O. and I.S.; writing—original draft preparation, I.S., R.T. and E.A.; writing—review and editing, all authors; visualization, I.S.; supervision, R.T.; project administration, E.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the RSU Red Cross Medical College Ethics Committee (protocol number 31, 5 December 2019).
Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.
Data are available upon request.
We would like to extend our appreciation to the students of the RSU Red Cross Medical College (Diāna Krace, Kristīna Domareva, Daina Novika, Laima Platā, Sabīne Leimane) for their valuable contribution to the successful execution of the project.
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Footnotes
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Enlarge this image.Figure 1. Recommendation sources for the use of herbal medicines purchased by respondents (%).
Enlarge this image.Figure 4. The number of substances used (prescription and over-the-counter drugs) by age median. The blue line represents young people aged 18 to 39 years, while the orange line represents older patients.
Demographic characteristics of the respondents.
| Characteristics | Frequency | Percentage, n = 504 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 18–29 | 65 | 12.9 |
| 30–39 | 103 | 20.4 | |
| 40–49 | 106 | 21.0 | |
| 50–59 | 91 | 18.1 | |
| 60–69 | 70 | 13.9 | |
| 70–79 | 51 | 10.1 | |
| 80–95 | 18 | 3.6 | |
| Sex | Female | 380 | 75.4 |
| Male | 124 | 24.6 | |
| Education | Basic education | 29 | 5.8 |
| Secondary education | 238 | 47.2 | |
| Higher education | 236 | 46.8 | |
| Doctoral degree | 1 | 0.2 | |
| Region | City | 297 | 58.9 |
| Town | 119 | 23.6 | |
| Countryside | 88 | 17.5 |
Long-term conditions or chronic diseases.
| Long-Term Health Condition | Frequency (%) |
|---|---|
| Back pain | 185 (69.5%) |
| High blood pressure | 157 (59.0%) |
| Allergies | 72 (27.1%) |
| Depression, anxiety | 56 (21.1%) |
| High blood cholesterol and fats | 56 (21.1%) |
| Gastric or peptic ulcer disease | 55 (20.7%) |
| Heart disease | 49 (18.4%) |
| Kidney and urinary tract diseases | 49 (18.4%) |
| Different types of arthritis | 41 (15.4%) |
| Lung diseases | 29 (10.9%) |
| Anaemia or any other blood condition | 17 (6.4%) |
| Osteoporosis (bone atrophy) | 15 (5.6%) |
| Diabetes | 15 (5.6%) |
| Cancer | 12 (4.5%) |
| Liver diseases | 5 (2.3%) |
| Other (thyroid problems, bone fractures, joint injuries, gynaecologic diseases, venous problems, and others) | 62 (23.3%) |
Potential clinically significant interactions between herbal medicines and the most common conventional drugs used by respondents.
| Herbal Medicine | Conventional Drug | Clinical Result of Interaction | Classification of Drug Interaction * | Comments | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grapefruit |
Dextromethorphan | Grapefruit increases the level or effect of dextromethorphan and ivabradine by affecting hepatic/intestinal enzyme CYP3A4 metabolism. | Serious | [ |
|
| St. John’s wort |
Amitriptyline, citalopram, clomipramine, dextromethorphan, escitalopram, mirtazapine, paroxetine, sertraline, trazodone, venlafaxine | Coadministration may potentiate the risk of serotonin syndrome, which is a rare but serious and potentially fatal condition thought to result from hyperstimulation of brainstem 5-HT1A and 2A receptors. | Serious | [ |
|
| Alprazolam, atorvastatin, carbamazepine, clopidogrel, diazepam, felodipine | St. John’s wort decreases the level or effect of the drug by affecting hepatic/intestinal enzyme CYP3A4 metabolism. | Serious | Special attention should be given when using any drug that is metabolized by CYP3A4, CYP2C9, CYP2C19, or P-glycoprotein in combination with another substance because it may lead to a reduction of plasma concentrations. | [ |
|
| Dabigatran | Coadministration with potent inducers of P-glycoprotein may significantly reduce the bioavailability of dabigatran following oral administration. | Serious | [ |
||
| Drospirenone, oestradiol, ethinylestradiol, ivabradine, loratadine, nifedipine, prednisolone, sildenafil, rivaroxaban, trazodone | St. John’s wort decreases the level or effect of these drugs by affecting hepatic/intestinal enzyme CYP3A4 metabolism. | Serious | Coadministration with St. John’s wort may reduce the efficacy of contraceptive hormones. Nonhormonal contraception is recommended. | [ |
|
| Valerian |
Alprazolam, clonazepam, codeine, diazepam, gabapentin, phenobarbital | Coadministration of valerian and these drugs increases sedation effects. | Serious | [ |
|
| Alder buckthorn |
Hydrochlorothiazide, indapamide | Prolonged or excessive use of laxatives can enhance the pharmacological impact of diuretics. Laxatives have the potential to lead to substantial depletion of fluids and essential electrolytes like sodium, potassium (resulting in hypokalemia), magnesium, and zinc. These effects could be cumulative when combined with the effects of diuretics. | Moderate | [ |
|
| Echinacea |
Acetaminophen | Coadministration with echinacea may increase the plasma concentrations and the risk of adverse effects of drugs that are substrates of CYP450 1A2. | Moderate | [ |
|
| Amlodipine, atorvastatin | Coadministration with echinacea may alter the plasma concentrations and therapeutic effects of drugs that are substrates of CYP450 3A4. | Moderate | [ |
||
| Garlic |
Aceclofenac, aspirin, diclofenac, ibuprofen | Garlic has the potential to enhance the effects of anticoagulants, platelet inhibitors, and thrombolytic agents, which may lead to an increased risk of bleeding. | Moderate | Garlic powder, aged garlic preparations, garlic oil, and fresh garlic all contain antiplatelet activity. Some isolated reports have linked chronic and high dietary intake of garlic to bleeding complications. | [ |
| Ginger |
Aceclofenac, aspirin, diclofenac, ibuprofen | Ginger has the potential to enhance the effects of anticoagulants, platelet inhibitors, and thrombolytic agents, which could potentially increase the risk of bleeding. | Moderate | [ |
|
| Ginkgo |
Aspirin, ibuprofen, diclofenac | Ginkgo may potentiate the risk of bleeding associated with anticoagulants, platelet inhibitors, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and thrombolytic agents. | Moderate | Consumption of ginkgo should be avoided during the use of coagulation-modifying agents and at least two weeks prior to surgery. | [ |
| Hydrochlorothiazide, indapamide | Blood pressure may increase following the addition of ginkgo while receiving a thiazide diuretic. | Moderate | [ |
||
| Ginseng |
Aceclofenac, aspirin, diclofenac, ibuprofen | Ginseng may potentiate the effects of anticoagulants, platelet inhibitors, and thrombolytic agents, possibly increasing the risk of bleeding. | Moderate | [ |
|
| Grapefruit |
Atorvastatin | Grapefruit juice can increase atorvastatin blood levels. | Moderate | The combination of certain medications, such as atorvastatin, with grapefruit juice can increase the risk of side effects like liver damage and a rare but serious condition known as rhabdomyolysis, which involves the breakdown of skeletal muscle tissue. Therefore, it is recommended to limit grapefruit juice consumption to no more than 1 quart per day while undergoing atorvastatin treatment to mitigate these risks. | [ |
| Green tea |
Aspirin, diclofenac, ibuprofen | Combination may increase the risk of bleeding. | Moderate | [ |
|
| Licorice |
Amlodipine, bisoprolol, metoprolol, nebivolol, perindopril, ramipril | Licorice use has been associated with hypertension and may antagonize the effects of antihypertensive agents. | Moderate | The use of licorice should be avoided in conjunction with diuretics, cardiac glycosides, corticosteroids, stimulant laxatives, or other medications that may worsen electrolyte imbalance. | [ |
| Indapamide, hydrochlorothiazide | Chronic use of licorice may potentiate the hypokalemic effects of some diuretics and other drugs that deplete potassium. | Moderate | Severe hypokalaemia can lead to muscle paralysis, rhabdomyolysis, metabolic alkalosis, cardiac arrhythmias, and respiratory arrest. | [ |
|
| Motherwort |
Phenylephrine | Motherwort decreases both blood pressure and heart rate, while phenylephrine increases both blood pressure and heart rate. | Moderate | [ |
|
| Nettle |
Aceclofenac, aspirin, diclofenac, ibuprofen | Nettle reduces the anticoagulant effect of aceclofenac, aspirin, diclofenac, and ibuprofen and lower plasma concentrations. | Moderate | [ |
|
| Senna |
Hydrochlorothiazide, indapamide | Prolonged or excessive use of laxatives can enhance the pharmacological impact of diuretics. Laxatives have the potential to cause considerable loss of fluids and essential electrolytes, such as sodium, potassium (resulting in hypokalemia), magnesium, and zinc. These effects may add up to the effects of diuretics. | Moderate | [ |
|
| Siberian ginseng |
Aceclofenac, aspirin, diclofenac, ibuprofen | Coadministration increases anticoagulation. | Moderate | [ |
|
| Atorvastatin | St. John’s wort decreases the level or effect of atorvastatin by P-glycoprotein (MDR1) efflux transporter. | Moderate | [ |
||
| Amlodipine, omeprazole | Coadministration with potent inducers of CYP450 2C19 and 3A4 may significantly decrease the plasma concentrations of the drug. | Moderate | The interaction is likely to also occur with esomeprazole, an enantiomer of omeprazole. | [ |
|
| Birch |
Hydrochlorothiazide, indapamide | Birch increases the effects of these drugs by pharmacodynamic synergism. | Minor | [ |
|
| Chamomile |
Aspirin | In theory, consuming large amounts of chamomile could increase the risk of bleeding in patients undergoing treatment with drugs that impact the body’s ability to control bleeding, such as anticoagulants, platelet inhibitors, thrombin inhibitors, thrombolytic agents, or medications that often lead to low platelet counts (thrombocytopenia). | Minor | For patients who have extensively used chamomile before starting anticoagulation, antiplatelet, or thrombolytic therapy, it is crucial to consider the potential for interactions. | [ |
| Evening primrose |
Aspirin | Theoretically, the use of evening primrose oil with anticoagulants or antiplatelet aggregation drugs may increase the risk of bleeding in some patients. | Minor | [ |
|
| Garlic |
Amlodipine, bisoprolol, hydrochlorothiazide, indapamide, metoprolol, nebivolol, perindopril, ramipril | Garlic has been found in some studies to lower blood pressure and may theoretically potentiate the effects of hypotensive agents. There have been no reports of clinical hypotension associated with the concomitant use of garlic and antihypertensive agents. | Minor | [ |
|
| Grapefruit |
Amlodipine | Grapefruit increases the level or effect of amlodipine by affecting hepatic/intestinal enzyme CYP3A4 metabolism. | Minor | [ |
|
| Green tea |
Acetaminophen | Combination may increase the risk of bleeding. | Minor | [ |
|
| Atorvastatin, rosuvastatin | Coadministration with green tea may decrease oral bioavailability. | Minor | [ |
||
| Sage |
Phenylephrine | Sage lowers blood pressure, while phenylephrine increases blood pressure | Minor | [ |
* Drug interactions were categorized into three groups: serious, which are highly clinically important and require avoiding the combination or using an alternative drug; moderate, which has moderate clinical significance and should generally be avoided, or may be used only in specific situations; and minor, which has minimal clinical significance, and their risks should be evaluated and minimized while considering alternative drugs.
Supplementary Materials
The following supporting information can be downloaded at:
References
1. Garcia-Alvarez, A.; Egan, B.; de Klein, S.; Dima, L.; Maggi, F.M.; Isoniemi, M.; Ribas-Barba, L.; Raats, M.M.; Meissner, E.M.; Badea, M. et al. Usage of Plant Food Supplements across Six European Countries: Findings from the PlantLIBRA Consumer Survey. PLoS ONE; 2014; 9, e92265. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0092265]
2. Ekor, M. The growing use of herbal medicines: Issues relating to adverse reactions and challenges in monitoring safety. Front. Pharmacol.; 2014; 4, 177. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2013.00177] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24454289]
3. Posadzki, P.; Watson, L.; Ernst, E. Herb-drug interactions: An overview of systematic reviews. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol.; 2013; 75, pp. 603-618. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2125.2012.04350.x] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22670731]
4. Shi, S.; Klotz, U. Drug Interactions with Herbal Medicines. Clin. Pharmacokinet.; 2012; 51, pp. 77-104. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2165/11597910-000000000-00000]
5. Fasinu, P.S.; Bouic, P.J.; Rosenkranz, B. An Overview of the Evidence and Mechanisms of Herb–Drug Interactions. Front. Pharmacol.; 2012; 3, 69. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2012.00069]
6. Al-Ramahi, R.; Jaradat, N.; Shalalfeh, R.; Nasir, S.; Manasra, Y.; Shalalfeh, I.; Esam, Y. Evaluation of potential drug- herb interactions among a group of Palestinian patients with chronic diseases. BMC Complement. Altern. Med.; 2015; 15, 221. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12906-015-0764-7]
7. Awortwe, C.; Makiwane, M.; Reuter, H.; Muller, C.; Louw, J.; Rosenkranz, B. Critical evaluation of causality assessment of herb-drug interactions in patients. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol.; 2018; 84, pp. 679-693. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bcp.13490]
8. Gavronski, M.; Volmer, D. Safety concerns in simultaneous use of prescription and ‘over-the-counter’ medicines- results of patient survey in Estonia. Springerplus; 2014; 3, 143. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2193-1801-3-143]
9. Ara, T.; Viqar, M.; Arshad, J. Use of Herbal Products and Potential Interactions in Patients With Cardiovascular Diseases. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.; 2010; 55, pp. 515-525.
10. De Smet, P.A.G.M. Clinical risk management of herb-drug interactions. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol.; 2007; 63, pp. 258-267. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2125.2006.02797.x]
11. Strauch, K.; Lutz, U.; Bittner, N.; Lutz, W.K. Dose–response relationship for the pharmacokinetic interaction of grapefruit juice with dextromethorphan investigated by human urinary metabolite profiles. Food Chem. Toxicol.; 2009; 47, pp. 1928-1935. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2009.05.004]
12. Markowitz, J.S.; Donovan, J.L.; Lindsay Devane, C.; Taylor, R.M.; Ruan, Y.; Wang, J.-S.; Chavin, K.D. Effect of St John’s Wort on Drug Metabolism by Induction of Cytochrome P450 3A4 Enzyme. JAMA; 2003; 290, pp. 1500-1504. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.290.11.1500] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/13129991]
13. Izzo, A.A. Drug Interactions with St. John’s Wort (Hypericum Perforatum): A Review of the Clinical Evidence. Int. J. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther.; 2004; 42, pp. 139-148. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5414/CPP42139] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15049433]
14. Borrelli, F.; Izzo, A.A. Herb–Drug Interactions with St John’s Wort (Hypericum perforatum): An Update on Clinical Observations. AAPS J.; 2009; 11, pp. 710-727. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1208/s12248-009-9146-8]
15. Moore, L.B.; Goodwin, B.; Jones, S.A.; Wisely, G.B.; Serabjit-Singh, C.J.; Willson, T.M.; Collins, J.L.; Kliewer, S.A.S. John’s wort induces hepatic drug metabolism through activation of the pregnane X receptor. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA; 2000; 97, pp. 7500-7502. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.130155097]
16. Ioannides, C. Topics in Xenobiochemistry Pharmacokinetic Interactions between Herbal Remedies and Medicinal Drugs. Xenobiotica; 2002; 32, pp. 451-478. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00498250210124147]
17. Mannel, M. Drug Interactions with St John’s Wort Mechanisms and Clinical Implications. Drug Saf.; 2004; 27, pp. 773-797.
18. Yue, Q.-Y.; Bergquist, C.; Gerdén, B. Safety of St John’s wort (Hypericum perforatum). Lancet; 2000; 355, pp. 576-577. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(05)73227-x]
19. Schwarz, U.I.; Büschel, B.; Kirch, W. Unwanted Pregnancy on Self-Medication with St John’s Wort despite Hormonal Contraception. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol.; 2003; 55, pp. 112-113. [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12534648]
20. Miller, L.G. Herbal Medicinals Selected Clinical Considerations Focusing on Known or Potential Drug-Herb Interactions. Arch. Intern. Med.; 1998; 158, pp. 2200-2211. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1001/archinte.158.20.2200]
21. Carrasco, M.C.; Ramón Vallejo, J.; Pardo-De-Santayana, M.; Peral, D.; Martín, M.Á.; Altimiras, J. Interactions of Valeriana officinalis L. and Passiflora incarnata L. in a Patient Treated with Lorazepam. Phytother. Res.; 2009; 23, pp. 1795-1796. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ptr.2847] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19441067]
22. Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products (HMPC). Assessment Report on Rhamnus frangula L. Cortex. European Medicines Agency; 2019; EMA/HMPC/483550/2018. Available online: https://www.ema.europa.eu/ (accessed on 11 June 2023).
23. Gorski, J.; Huang, S.; Pinto, A.; Hamman, M.A.; Hilligoss, J.K.; Zaheer, N.A.; Desai, M.; Miller, M.; Hall, S.D. The effect of echinacea (Echinacea purpurea root) on cytochrome P450 activity in vivo. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther.; 2004; 75, pp. 89-100. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clpt.2003.09.013] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14749695]
24. Mukherjee, P.K.; Ponnusankar, S.; Pandit, S.; Hazam, P.K.; Ahmmed, M.; Mukherjee, K. Botanicals as medicinal food and their effects on drug metabolizing enzymes. Food Chem. Toxicol.; 2011; 49, pp. 3142-3153. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2011.09.015]
25. Chen, X.-W.; Serag, E.S.; Sneed, K.B.; Liang, J.; Chew, H.; Pan, S.-Y.; Zhou, S.-F. Clinical Herbal Interactions with Conventional Drugs: From Molecules to Maladies. Curr. Med. Chem.; 2011; 18, pp. 4836-4850. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2174/092986711797535317]
26. Abebe, W. Herbal Medication: Potential for Adverse Interactions with Analgesic Drugs. J. Clin. Pharm. Ther.; 2002; 27, pp. 391-401. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2710.2002.00444.x] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12472978]
27. Ali, B.H.; Blunden, G.; Tanira, M.O.; Nemmar, A. Some phytochemical, pharmacological and toxicological properties of ginger (Zingiber officinale Roscoe): A review of recent research. Food Chem. Toxicol.; 2008; 46, pp. 409-420. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2007.09.085]
28. Marx, W.; McKavanagh, D.; McCarthy, A.L.; Bird, R.; Ried, K.; Chan, A.; Isenring, L. The Effect of Ginger (Zingiber officinale) on Platelet Aggregation: A Systematic Literature Review. PLoS ONE; 2015; 10, e0141119. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0141119]
29. Izzo, A.A.; Di Carlo, G.; Borrelli, F.; Ernst, E. Cardiovascular pharmacotherapy and herbal medicines: The risk of drug interaction. Int. J. Cardiol.; 2005; 98, pp. 1-14. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2003.06.039]
30. Williamson, E.M. Drug Interactions Between Herbal and Prescription Medicines. Drug Saf.; 2003; 26, pp. 1075-1092. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2165/00002018-200326150-00002]
31. Kashihara, Y.; Ieiri, I.; Yoshikado, T.; Maeda, K.; Fukae, M.; Kimura, M.; Hirota, T.; Matsuki, S.; Irie, S.; Izumi, N. et al. Small-Dosing Clinical Study: Pharmacokinetic, Pharmacogenomic (SLCO2B1 and ABCG2), and Interaction (Atorvastatin and Grapefruit Juice) Profiles of 5 Probes for OATP2B1 and BCRP. J. Pharm. Sci.; 2017; 106, pp. 2688-2694. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.xphs.2017.03.010]
32. Holtzman, C.W.; Wiggins, B.S.; Spinler, S.A. Role of P-glycoprotein in Statin Drug Interactions. Pharmacother. J. Hum. Pharmacol. Drug Ther.; 2006; 26, pp. 1601-1607. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1592/phco.26.11.1601]
33. Nugala, B.; Namasi, A.; Emmadi, P.; Krishna, P.M. Role of green tea as an antioxidant in periodontal disease: The Asian paradox. J. Indian Soc. Periodontol.; 2012; 16, pp. 313-316. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-124X.100902] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23162321]
34. Varma, R.; Ross, C.N. Liquorice: A root cause of secondary hypertension. JRSM Open; 2017; 8, 205427041668520. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2054270416685208]
35. Atkinson, H.C.; Potts, A.L.; Anderson, B.J. Potential cardiovascular adverse events when phenylephrine is combined with paracetamol: Simulation and narrative review. Eur. J. Clin. Pharmacol.; 2015; 71, pp. 931-938. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00228-015-1876-1]
36. Ritter, M.; Melichar, K.; Strahler, S.; Kuchta, K.; Schulte, J.; Sartiani, L.; Cerbai, E.; Mugelli, A.; Mohr, F.-W.; Rauwald, H.W. et al. Cardiac and Electrophysiological Effects of Primary and Refined Extracts from Leonurus cardiaca L. (Ph. Eur.). Planta Medica; 2010; 76, pp. 572-582. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0029-1240602] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19918711]
37. Agbabiaka, T.B.; Spencer, N.H.; Khanom, S.; Goodman, C. Prevalence of Drug—Herb and Drug—Supplement Interactions in Older Adults: A cross-sectional survey. Br. J. Gen. Pract.; 2018; 68, pp. e711-e717. [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30249608]
38. Tsai, H.-H.; Lin, H.-W.; Lu, Y.-H.; Chen, Y.-L.; Mahady, G.B. A Review of Potential Harmful Interactions between Anticoagulant/Antiplatelet Agents and Chinese Herbal Medicines. PLoS ONE; 2013; 8, e64255. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0064255]
39. Donovan, J.L.; DeVane, C.L.; Chavin, K.D.; Taylor, R.M.; Markowitz, J.S. Siberian ginseng (Eleutheroccus senticosus) effects on cyp2d6 and cyp3a4 activity in normal volunteers. Drug Metab. Dispos.; 2003; 31, pp. 519-522. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1124/dmd.31.5.519]
40. Lippert, A.; Renner, B. Herb–Drug Interaction in Inflammatory Diseases: Review of Phytomedicine and Herbal Supplements. J. Clin. Med.; 2022; 11, 1567. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11061567] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35329893]
41. Raudonė, L.; Raudonis, R.; Janulis, V.; Viškelis, P. Quality evaluation of different preparations of dry extracts of birch (Betula pendula Roth) leaves. Nat. Prod. Res.; 2014; 28, pp. 1645-1648. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14786419.2014.925893]
42. Agbabiaka, T.B.; Wider, B.; Watson, L.K.; Goodman, C. Concurrent Use of Prescription Drugs and Herbal Medicinal Products in Older Adults: A Systematic Review. Drugs Aging; 2017; 34, pp. 891-905. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40266-017-0501-7]
43. Chan, W.J.J.; McLachlan, A.J.; Luca, E.J.; Harnett, J.E. Garlic (Allium sativum L.) in the Management of Hypertension and Dyslipidemia—A Systematic Review. J. Herb. Med.; 2020; 19, 100292. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hermed.2019.100292]
44. Mouly, S.; Lloret-Linares, C.; Sellier, P.-O.; Sene, D.; Bergmann, J.-F. Is the clinical relevance of drug-food and drug-herb interactions limited to grapefruit juice and Saint-John’s Wort?. Pharmacol. Res.; 2017; 118, pp. 82-92. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.phrs.2016.09.038]
45. Werba, J.P.; Misaka, S.; Giroli, M.G.; Shimomura, K.; Amato, M.; Simonelli, N.; Vigo, L.; Tremoli, E. Update of green tea interactions with cardiovascular drugs and putative mechanisms. J. Food Drug Anal.; 2018; 26, pp. S72-S77. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jfda.2018.01.008] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29703388]
46. Sá, C.M.; Ramos, A.A.; Azevedo, M.F.; Lima, C.F.; Fernandes-Ferreira, M.; Pereira-Wilson, C. Sage Tea Drinking Improves Lipid Profile and Antioxidant Defences in Humans. Int. J. Mol. Sci.; 2009; 10, pp. 3937-3950. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms10093937] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19865527]
47. Sile, I.; Romane, E.; Reinsone, S.; Maurina, B.; Tirzite, D.; Dambrova, M. Medicinal plants and their uses recorded in the Archives of Latvian Folklore from the 19th century. J. Ethnopharmacol.; 2020; 249, 112378. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2019.112378]
48. Yilmaz, M.B.; Yontar, O.C.; Turgut, O.O.; Yilmaz, A.; Yalta, K.; Gul, M.; Tandogan, I. Herbals in cardiovascular practice: Are physicians neglecting anything?. Int. J. Cardiol.; 2007; 122, pp. 48-51. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2006.11.017]
49. Kennedy, J. Herb and supplement use in the US adult population. Clin. Ther.; 2005; 27, pp. 1847-1858. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clinthera.2005.11.004]
50. Picking, D.; Younger, N.; Mitchell, S.; Delgoda, R. The prevalence of herbal medicine home use and concomitant use with pharmaceutical medicines in Jamaica. J. Ethnopharmacol.; 2011; 137, pp. 305-311. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2011.05.025]
51. Samojlik, I.; Mijatović, V.; Gavarić, N.; Krstin, S.; Božin, B. Consumers’ attitude towards the use and safety of herbal medicines and herbal dietary supplements in Serbia. Int. J. Clin. Pharm.; 2013; 35, pp. 835-840. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11096-013-9819-3]
52. Sánchez, M.; González-Burgos, E.; Iglesias, I.; Lozano, R.; Gómez-Serranillos, M.P. Current uses and knowledge of medicinal plants in the Autonomous Community of Madrid (Spain): A descriptive cross-sectional study. BMC Complement. Med. Ther.; 2020; 20, 306. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12906-020-03089-x]
53. Kennedy, D.A.; Lupattelli, A.; Koren, G.; Nordeng, H. Safety classification of herbal medicines used in pregnancy in a multinational study. BMC Complement. Altern. Med.; 2016; 16, 102. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12906-016-1079-z]
54. Welz, A.N.; Emberger-Klein, A.; Menrad, K. The importance of herbal medicine use in the German health-care system: Prevalence, usage pattern, and influencing factors. BMC Health Serv. Res.; 2019; 19, 952. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-019-4739-0]
55. Qato, D.M.; Alexander, G.C.; Conti, R.M.; Johnson, M.; Schumm, P.; Lindau, S.T. Use of Prescription and Over-the-counter Medications and Dietary Supplements Among Older Adults in the United States. JAMA; 2008; 300, pp. 2867-2878. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.2008.892]
56. González-Stuart, A. Herbal product use by older adults. Maturitas; 2011; 68, pp. 52-55. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2010.09.006]
57. Rahmawati, R.; Bajorek, B.V. Self-medication among people living with hypertension: A review. Fam. Pract.; 2017; 34, pp. 147-153. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmw137]
58. Hassen, G.; Belete, G.; Carrera, K.G.; Iriowen, R.O.; Araya, H.; Alemu, T.; Solomon, N.; Bam, D.S.; Nicola, S.M.; Araya, M.E. et al. Clinical Implications of Herbal Supplements in Conventional Medical Practice: A US Perspective. Cureus; 2022; 14, e26893. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.26893] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35978741]
59. Zhang, J.; Onakpoya, I.J.; Posadzki, P.; Eddouks, M. The Safety of Herbal Medicine: From Prejudice to Evidence. Evid. -Based Complement. Altern. Med.; 2015; 2015, 316706.
60. Delgoda, R.; Westlake, A.C.G. Herbal Interactions Involving Cytochrome P450 Enzymes: A Mini Review. Toxicol. Rev.; 2004; 23, pp. 239-249. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2165/00139709-200423040-00004] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15898829]
61. Gurley, B.J.; Gardner, S.F.; Hubbard, M.A.; Williams, D.K.; Gentry, W.B.; Khan, I.A.; Shah, A. In vivo effects of goldenseal, kava kava, black cohosh, and valerian on human cytochrome P450 1A2, 2D6, 2E1, and 3A4/5 phenotypes. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther.; 2005; 77, pp. 415-426. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clpt.2005.01.009]
62. Izzo, A.A. Interactions between Herbs and Conventional Drugs: Overview of the Clinical Data. Med. Princ. Pract.; 2012; 21, pp. 404-428. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000334488] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22236736]
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Details
; Teterovska, Renate 2 ; Onzevs, Oskars 3 ; Ardava, Elita 4 1 Department of Applied Pharmacy, Riga Stradins University, 16 Dzirciema Street, LV-1007 Riga, Latvia; Latvian Institute of Organic Synthesis, 21 Aizkraukles Street, LV-1006 Riga, Latvia
2 Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Riga Stradins University, 16 Dzirciema Street, LV-1007 Riga, Latvia;
3 Department of Commerce, Turība University, 68 Graudu Street, LV-1058 Riga, Latvia;
4 Department of Pharmacy, Riga Stradins University Red Cross Medical College, 5 J. Asara Street, LV-1009 Riga, Latvia;