ABSTRACT
Curcumin is the primary polyphenol in turmeric's curcuminoid class. It has a wide range of therapeutic applications, such as anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, antidiabetic, hepatoprotective, antibacterial, and anticancer effects against various cancers, but has poor solubility and low bioavailability. Objective: To improve curcumin's bioavailability, plasma concentration, and cellular permeability processes. The nanocurcumin approach over curcumin has been proven appropriate for encapsulating or loading curcumin (nanocurcumin) to increase its therapeutic potential. Conclusion: Though incorporating curcumin into nanocurcumin form may be a viable method for overcoming its intrinsic limitations, and there are reasonable concerns regarding its toxicological safety once it enters biological pathways. This review article mainly highlights the therapeutic benefits of nanocurcumin over curcumin.
Subject(s)
Chronic Disease/drug therapy , Curcumin/therapeutic use , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Anti-Inflammatory Agents/chemistry , Anti-Inflammatory Agents/therapeutic use , Biological Availability , Chronic Disease/prevention & control , Curcumin/analogs & derivatives , Curcumin/chemistry , Humans , Nanoparticles/chemistry , Nanoparticles/therapeutic use , Nanotechnology , SolubilityABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization has recommended a patient-centered approach to tuberculosis drug administration. A central element of the patient-centered strategy is the use of treatment supporters to evaluate and elevate adherence to the treatment regimen and to address poor adherence when it occurs. This study was led to determine the part of various treatment supporters in the successful completion of treatment. METHOD: This study was conducted in two locales of Sindh, Hyderabad and Mirpurkhas. Information gathered included age, gender, regions, sort of treatment supporters (relatives, community and health facility workers) and treatment outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 773 patients incorporated into the study, 86.8% picked a family supporter, 7.63% selected community worker and 5.56% chose health facility worker as their treatment supporter. Women and younger patients were more likely to prefer that family members supervise their treatment. Treatment achievement rates among the patients regulated by the three kinds of treatment supporters, were not altogether unique in relation to each other (p=0.23 Chi square). CONCLUSION: The study demonstrates that TB patients ought to be urged to pick the supporter of their inclination as selection of treatment supporter outside the health system does not adversely affect TB treatment outcomes in limited resource settings.