Homoeopathic therapy in cervical spondylosis pain management: A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Gupta, Jaya; Bawaskar, Ramesh; Rao, P. T.; Shivadikar, Ashish; Sumithran, P Paul; Pal, Ramendra; Ali, Shahid; Bindu, Hima; arya,; Lamba, Chetna Deep; Kumar, Arvind; Kulshreshtha, Dimpi

doi:10.4103/ijrh.ijrh_70_19

Cited by 2 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In comparison with the trial by Gupta et al [18], our study had several advantages. The follow-up duration was 3 months which was higher than that of 8 days.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…The follow-up duration was 3 months which was higher than that of 8 days. Gupta et al [18] took cervical pain only into consideration, whereas the present study focused on other symptoms also. Gupta et al [18] made use of predefined homeopathic remedies in 30c potency, which is in disagreement with homeopathic principles.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Gupta et al [18] took cervical pain only into consideration, whereas the present study focused on other symptoms also. Gupta et al [18] made use of predefined homeopathic remedies in 30c potency, which is in disagreement with homeopathic principles. Thus, our study was methodologically stronger [18].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Gupta et al [18] made use of predefined homeopathic remedies in 30c potency, which is in disagreement with homeopathic principles. Thus, our study was methodologically stronger [18]. A study by Nayak et al [19] was an exploratory clinical trial, whereas our study is of the gold standard.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…No published systematic review or meta-analysis was identifiable. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial by Gupta et al [18] remained statistically inconclusive but revealed some promising effects in managing acute pain of CS. A multicenter, randomized, exploratory clinical study conducted on 60 patients suffering from CS found that medicines in LM potency acted better than CM potencies for pain management of CS [19].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Efficacy of Individualized Homeopathic Medicines in the Treatment of Cervical Spondylosis: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Cervical spondylosis (CS) is a degenerative condition of the cervical spine, with approximately 80-90% of people suffering from disc degeneration by the age of 50 years. This trial attempts at evaluating the efficacy of individualized homeopathic medicines (IHMs) against placebos in the treatment of CS. Methods: A 3-months, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial was conducted at the Organon of Medicine outpatient department of the National Institute of Homoeopathy, India. Patients were randomized to receive either IHMs (n=70) or identical-looking placebos (n=70) in the mutual context of concomitant conservative and standard physiotherapeutic care. Primary outcome measures were 0-10 Numeric Rating Scales (NRSs) for pain, stiffness, numbness, tingling, weakness, and vertigo, and the secondary outcome was Neck Disability Index (NDI); measured at baseline and every month, until 3 months. The intention-to-treat sample was analyzed to detect group differences and effect sizes. Results: Overall, improvements were clinically significant and higher in the IHMs group than placebo, but group differences were statistically non-significant with small effect sizes (all P>0.05, two-way repeated measure analysis of variance). After 2 months of time points, improvements observed in the IHMs group were significantly higher than placebo on a few occasions (e.g., pain NRS: P<0.001; stiffness NRS: P=0.024; weakness NRS: P=0.003). Sulfur (n=21; 15%) was the most frequently prescribed medication. No harm, unintended effects, or any serious adverse events were reported from either group. Conclusions: An encouraging, but non-significant direction of effect was elicited favoring IHMs against placebos in the treatment of CS. Trial registration: CTRI/2018/10/016156; UTN: U1111-1221-8064

show abstract

“…In comparison with the trial by Gupta et al [18], our study had several advantages. The follow-up duration was 3 months which was higher than that of 8 days.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%