table of contents 
The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of homeopathy …
|
Table 1
|
Demographic data
|
Children
|
Homeopathy, n = 407
|
Conventional n = 252
|
p-value, if
|
|
Male (%)
|
51.1
|
50.0
|
|
Female (%)
|
48.9
|
50.0
|
|
Age
|
6.6 ± 4.3
|
7.4 ± 4.7
|
= 0.0282a
|
BMI
|
16.6 ± 3.0
|
17.9 ± 3.7
|
= 0.0001a
|
|
Adults
|
Homeopathy n = 445
|
Conventional n = 462
|
p-value, if
|
|
Male (%)
|
24.0
|
32.3
|
= 0.0064b
|
Female (%)
|
76.0
|
67.7
|
|
Age
|
37.1 ± 12.5
|
39.6 ± 13.9
|
= 0.0124a
|
BMI
|
24.3 ± 4.8
|
25.0 ± 4.5
|
= 0.0031a
|
Smoking (%)
|
16.2
|
22.3
|
|
|
| Full-set analysis values are either expressed as % of total or as mean ± SD, aWilcoxon rank-sum test, bFisher's exact test. |
Table 2
|
Distribution and severity score of chief complaints at Day 0
|
Children
|
Homeopathy n = 407
|
Conventional n = 252
|
|
Chief complaint
|
(%)
|
Severity score
|
(%)
|
Severity score
|
p-valuea if
|
|
Runny nose
|
9.8
|
1.1 ± 0.5
|
15.5
|
1.9 ± 0.7
|
= 0.0001
|
Sore throat
|
24.6
|
1.7 ± 0.6
|
23.0
|
1.6 ± 0.6
|
|
Ear pain
|
23.1
|
1.4 ± 0.6
|
21.0
|
1.0 ± 0.5
|
= 0.0002
|
Sinus pain
|
2.0
|
1.6 ± 0.4
|
3.6
|
1.7 ± 0.6
|
|
Cough
|
40.5
|
0.9 ± 0.5
|
36.9
|
1.1 ± 0.6
|
|
|
Adults
|
Homeopathy n = 445
|
Conventional n = 462
|
|
Chief complaint
|
%
|
Severity score
|
%
|
Severity score
|
p-valuea if
|
|
Runny nose
|
15.1
|
1.5 ± 0.8
|
14.7
|
1.9 ± 0.7
|
= 0.0005
|
Sore throat
|
43.4
|
1.6 ± 0.7
|
32.3
|
1.5 ± 0.6
|
|
Ear pain
|
3.4
|
1.0 ± 0.3
|
5.4
|
1.3 ± 0.5
|
|
Sinus pain
|
8.3
|
1.5 ± 0.6
|
13.4
|
1.5 ± 0.6
|
|
Cough
|
29.9
|
1.0 ± 0.5
|
34.2
|
1.3 ± 0.5
|
= 0.0002
|
|
| Full-set analysis values are either expressed as % of total or as mean ± SD. aWilcoxon rank-sum test, indicating the differences between severity scores (from 0 – not present to 4 – very severe) in the homeopathy and conventional group. |
Table 3
|
The most frequently prescribed medications
|
Children
|
|
Adults
|
|
Homeopathic treatment n = 407
|
%
|
Homeopathic treatment n = 445
|
%
|
|
1. Belladonna
|
13.3
|
1. Hepar sulphuris
|
9.7
|
2. Pulsatilla
|
10.6
|
2. Belladonna
|
8.3
|
3. Hepar sulphuris
|
6.6
|
3. Bryonia alba
|
7.2
|
4. Mercurius solubilis
|
6.4
|
4. Lycopodium clavatum
|
7.2
|
5. Phosphorus
|
4.9
|
5. Kalium bichromicum
|
5.8
|
6. Bryonia alba
|
3.7
|
6. Mercurius solubilis
|
4.9
|
7. Calcarea carbonica
|
3.7
|
7. Allium cepa
|
4.5
|
8. Lycopodium clavatum
|
3.7
|
8. Phosphorus
|
3.4
|
9. Sulphur
|
3.7
|
9. Causticum
|
3.1
|
10. Phytolacca decandra
|
3.4
|
10. Gelsemium sempervirens
|
2.7
|
|
Conventional treatment n = 252
|
%
|
Conventional treatment n = 462
|
%
|
|
1. Antibacterials
|
28.2
|
1. Antibacterials
|
39.4
|
2. Nasal preparations
|
22.6
|
2. Nasal preparations
|
15.2
|
3. Analgesics
|
12.7
|
3. Analgesics
|
9.5
|
4. Stomatological preparations
|
8.7
|
4. Cough/cold preparations
|
8.7
|
5. Anti-asthmatics
|
5.6
|
5. Stomatological preparations
|
5.2
|
|
rating: 0.00 from 0 votes | updated on: 20 Aug 2007 | views: 309 |
|