You are here

  • Home
  • Online First
  • Complementary and alternative treatments of multiple sclerosis: a review of the evidence from 2001 to 2016

Article Text

Article menu

other Versions

Download PDFPDF
Multiple sclerosis
Review
Complementary and alternative treatments of multiple sclerosis: a review of the evidence from 2001 to 2016
  1. Suzi B Claflin,
  2. Ingrid A F van der Mei,
  3. Bruce V Taylor
  1. Menzies Institute for Medical Research, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
  1. Correspondence to Professor Bruce V Taylor, Menzies Institute for Medical Research, University of Tasmania, 17 Liverpool Street, Hobart, TAS 7000, Australia; bruce.taylor{at}utas.edu.au

Abstract

People with multiple sclerosis (PwMS) commonly use complementary and alternative medicines (CAM), but an understanding of their efficacy is lacking. Here, we quantitatively review the class I and class II studies of treatment efficacy for multiple sclerosis from January 2001 to January 2017, in order to assess the modern evidence for CAM use. The 38 studies included in this review are divided across five CAM types (cannabis, diet, exercise, psychological approaches and other). We found little evidence to support CAM efficacy. The studies contained little replication in intervention, primary outcomes or study design. Six of 16 CAMs included in this review were only researched in a single study. Future work in this area should build consensus around study methodologies and primary outcomes.

  • complementary and alternative medicine
  • multiple sclerosis
  • treatment efficacy

https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2016-314490

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors SBC completed the review and literature review under the supervision of BVT. IAFvdM assisted with all apsects of critical review of the manuscript.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; externally peer reviewed.