4.6 Article

Antifatigue Effects of Panax ginseng CA Meyer: A Randomised, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 8, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0061271

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Research Foundation [R01-2007-000-11248-0, 20110003150]
  2. Republic of Korea's Ministry of Education, Science and Technology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The present study investigated the antifatigue effects of Panax ginseng C. A. Meyer in 90 subjects (21 men and 69 women) with idiopathic chronic fatigue (ICF) in a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled and parallel designed trial. A bespoke 20% ethanol extract of P. ginseng (1 g or 2 g day(-1)) or a placebo was administered to each group for 4 weeks, and then fatigue severity was monitored using a self-rating numeric scale (NRS) and a visual analogue scale (VAS) as a primary endpoint. Serum levels of reactive oxygen species (ROS), malondialdehyde (MDA), total glutathione (GSH) contents and glutathione reductase (GSH-Rd) activity were determined. After 4-week, P. ginseng administration decreased the total NRS score, but they were not statistically significant compared with placebo (P > 0.05). Mental NRS score was significantly improved by P. ginseng administrations as 20.4 +/- 5.0 to 15.1 +/- 6.5 [95% CI 2.3 similar to 8.2] for 1 g and 20.7 +/- 6.3 to 13.8 +/- 6.2 [95% CI 20.1 similar to 4.2] for 2 g compared with placebo 20.9 +/- 4.5 to 18.8 +/- 2.9 [95% CI 4.1 similar to 9.9, P > 0.01]. Only 2 g P. ginseng significantly reduced the VAS score from 7.3 +/- 1.3 to 4.4 +/- 1.8 [95% CI 0.7 similar to 1.8] compared with the placebo 7.1 +/- 1.0 to 5.8 +/- 1.3 [95% CI 2.2 similar to 3.7, P > 0.01]. ROS and MDA levels were lowered by P. ginseng compared to placebo. P. ginseng 1 g increased GSH concentration and GSH-Rd activity. Our results provide the first evidence of the antifatigue effects of P. ginseng in patients with ICF, and we submit that these changes in antioxidant properties contribute in part to its mechanism.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据