{"title":"Homoeopathy vs. conventional primary care in children during the first 24 months of life-a pragmatic randomised controlled trial.","authors":"Menachem Oberbaum, Anupriya Chaudhary, Hima Bindu Ponnam, Reetha Krishnan, Dinesh V Kumar, Mohammed Irfan, Debadatta Nayak, Swati Pandey, Akula Archana, Sai Bhargavi, Divya Taneja, Mohua Datta, Navin Pawaskar, Ravindra Mohan Pandey, Anil Khurana, Shepherd Roee Singer, Raj Kumar Manchanda","doi":"10.1007/s00431-024-05791-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To compare the difference between primary homoeopathic and conventional paediatric care in treating acute illnesses in children in their first 24 months of life. One hundred eight Indian singleton newborns delivered at 37 to 42 weeks gestation were randomised at birth (1:1) to receive either homoeopathic or conventional primary care for any acute illness over the study period. In the homoeopathic group, conventional medical treatment was added when medically indicated. Clinicians and parents were unblinded. Children in the homoeopathic group experienced significantly fewer sick days than those in the conventional group (RR: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.24-0.58; p < 0.001), with correspondingly fewer sickness episodes (RR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.32-0.87; p = .013), as well as fewer respiratory illnesses over the 24-month period. They were taller (F (1, 97) = 8.92, p = .004, partial eta squared = 0.84) but not heavier than their conventionally treated counterparts. They required fewer antibiotics, and their treatment cost was lower.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Homoeopathy, using conventional medicine as a safety backdrop, was more effective than conventional treatment in preventing sick days, sickness episodes, and respiratory illnesses in the first 24 months of life. It necessitated fewer antibiotics and its overall cost was lower. This study supports homoeopathy, using conventional medicine as a safety backdrop, as a safe and cost-effective primary care modality during the first 2 years of life.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Clinical Trial Registry-India (2018/09/015641). https://ctri.nic.in/Clinicaltrials/login.php What is Known: • Due to their holistic nature, many Complementary and Alternative Medical (CAM) modalities are not readily amenable to assessment by head-to-head RCT for a given Indication. • We propose a pragmatic, RCT comparing homoeopathic with conventional medicine as a system.</p><p><strong>What is new: </strong>• Homoeopathic was apparently superior to conventional primary care in preventing sick days, sickness episodes, and respiratory illness episodes and was significantly associated with growth in height but not weight and required fewer antibiotics in children from birth to 24 months of age.</p>","PeriodicalId":11997,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Pediatrics","volume":" ","pages":"5455-5465"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11527938/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Pediatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00431-024-05791-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
To compare the difference between primary homoeopathic and conventional paediatric care in treating acute illnesses in children in their first 24 months of life. One hundred eight Indian singleton newborns delivered at 37 to 42 weeks gestation were randomised at birth (1:1) to receive either homoeopathic or conventional primary care for any acute illness over the study period. In the homoeopathic group, conventional medical treatment was added when medically indicated. Clinicians and parents were unblinded. Children in the homoeopathic group experienced significantly fewer sick days than those in the conventional group (RR: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.24-0.58; p < 0.001), with correspondingly fewer sickness episodes (RR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.32-0.87; p = .013), as well as fewer respiratory illnesses over the 24-month period. They were taller (F (1, 97) = 8.92, p = .004, partial eta squared = 0.84) but not heavier than their conventionally treated counterparts. They required fewer antibiotics, and their treatment cost was lower.
Conclusion: Homoeopathy, using conventional medicine as a safety backdrop, was more effective than conventional treatment in preventing sick days, sickness episodes, and respiratory illnesses in the first 24 months of life. It necessitated fewer antibiotics and its overall cost was lower. This study supports homoeopathy, using conventional medicine as a safety backdrop, as a safe and cost-effective primary care modality during the first 2 years of life.
Trial registration: Clinical Trial Registry-India (2018/09/015641). https://ctri.nic.in/Clinicaltrials/login.php What is Known: • Due to their holistic nature, many Complementary and Alternative Medical (CAM) modalities are not readily amenable to assessment by head-to-head RCT for a given Indication. • We propose a pragmatic, RCT comparing homoeopathic with conventional medicine as a system.
What is new: • Homoeopathic was apparently superior to conventional primary care in preventing sick days, sickness episodes, and respiratory illness episodes and was significantly associated with growth in height but not weight and required fewer antibiotics in children from birth to 24 months of age.
期刊介绍:
The European Journal of Pediatrics (EJPE) is a leading peer-reviewed medical journal which covers the entire field of pediatrics. The editors encourage authors to submit original articles, reviews, short communications, and correspondence on all relevant themes and topics.
EJPE is particularly committed to the publication of articles on important new clinical research that will have an immediate impact on clinical pediatric practice. The editorial office very much welcomes ideas for publications, whether individual articles or article series, that fit this goal and is always willing to address inquiries from authors regarding potential submissions. Invited review articles on clinical pediatrics that provide comprehensive coverage of a subject of importance are also regularly commissioned.
The short publication time reflects both the commitment of the editors and publishers and their passion for new developments in the field of pediatrics.
EJPE is active on social media (@EurJPediatrics) and we invite you to participate.
EJPE is the official journal of the European Academy of Paediatrics (EAP) and publishes guidelines and statements in cooperation with the EAP.