ABSTRACT
Crude extract from the pericarp of the mangosteen (mangosteen extract [ME]) has exhibited several medicinal properties in both animal models and human cell lines. Interestingly, the cytotoxic activities were always observed in nonpolar fraction of the extract whereas the potent antioxidant was often found in polar fraction. Although it has been demonstrated that the polar fraction of ME exhibited the antioxidant activity, the safety of the polar fraction of ME has never been thoroughly investigated in humans. In this study, we investigated the safety of oral administration of the polar fraction of ME in 11 healthy Thai volunteers. During a 24-week period of the study, only minor and tolerable side effects were reported; no serious side effects were documented. Blood chemistry studies also showed no liver damage or kidney dysfunction in all subjects. We also demonstrated antioxidant property of the polar fraction of ME both in vitro and in vivo. Interestingly, oral administration of the polar fraction of ME enhanced the antioxidant capability of red blood cells and decreased oxidative damage to proteins within red blood cells and whole blood.
Subject(s)
Antioxidants/administration & dosage , Garcinia mangostana/chemistry , Plant Extracts/administration & dosage , Administration, Oral , Adult , Alanine Transaminase/metabolism , Antioxidants/adverse effects , Antioxidants/chemistry , Aspartate Aminotransferases/metabolism , Chromatography, Thin Layer , Dizziness/etiology , Erythrocytes/cytology , Erythrocytes/drug effects , Erythrocytes/metabolism , Exanthema/etiology , Female , Garcinia mangostana/metabolism , Humans , Liver/enzymology , Male , Middle Aged , Nausea/etiology , Oxidative Phosphorylation , Plant Extracts/adverse effects , Plant Extracts/chemistry , Reactive Oxygen Species/metabolism , Young AdultABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the validity and reliability of the Thai version of the confusion assessment method (CAM). MATERIAL AND METHOD: One hundred five inpatients who were consulted with the psychiatric consultation-liaison service unit, were enrolled in the present study. The validity assessment of the Thai version of the CAM was done by comparing it with the gold standard diagnosis of delirium by psychiatrists using DSM-IV-TR criteria. The reliability assessment was obtained from a sample of 35 patients assessed by two psychiatric residents. RESULTS: The Thai version of CAM had a sensitivity of 90% and specificity of 94.54. The positive predictive value was 93.75% and the negative predictive value was 91.23%. Likelihood ratio showed 16.5-fold risk of delirium positive through using the Thai CAM Interrater reliability in diagnosis of delirium was high (k = 0.77). CONCLUSION: The present study demonstrated that the Thai version of CAM is a valid and reliable tool for assessing and diagnosing delirium in Thailand.
