Mohsin Ali Khan1,2, Hifzur Rahman3, Syed Tasleem Raza3*, Mohammad Abbas4, Sachendra Pratap Singh3
1Chairman, American University of Barbados, Wildey, Saint Michael, Barbados. 2Chancellor, ERA University, Lucknow-226003, (UP), India. 3Department of Biochemistry, Era’s Lucknow Medical College and Hospital, Lucknow-226003, (UP), India.4Department of Microbiology, ERA University, Lucknow-226003, (UP), India
*Corresponding Author Email Address: email@example.com
Background: Unani system of medicine is comprehensive and the original source for modern medicine (Allopathy). Stool analysis, one of the most common methods of medical diagnosis. A detailed analysis of stool helps to detect alterations in the composition of the stool which aid in the diagnosis of many disorders, including health problems in liver. Stool is the metabolic wastes of the body and any irregularity indicates towards the diseased condition. It appeared by the change in colour, consistency, odour and mucous, concentration of your stool. Objective: The aim was to investigate the better and easy method of chronic liver disease diagnosis by comparison between ancient Unani method with the modern laboratory-based method (Hospital Lab Services) of stool analysis. Methods: In this study we randomly selected 245 subjects suffering from chronic liver disease and compared the stool analysis results of the patients obtained from Unani (visual examination) and Hospital Lab Services-HLS. Results: The results suggested that Unani method was slightly overestimating liver function test in comparison to HLS method. Conclusion: It was concluded that Unani method holds potential as a cheap and easy method of stool analysis for early diagnosis of various liver diseases in a low infrastructure setup.
Keywords: Liver Disorders, Stool Analysis, Unani, HLS
Citation: Khan MA, Rahman H, Raza ST, Abbas M, Singh SP. A Comparative Study between Ancient Unani Method with the Modern Laboratory-based Method of Stool Analysis in Chronic Liver Disease Patients. Canad J Clin Nutr 2019; 7 (1): 89-99.