Arnica montana 6x homeopathic tablets

PurposeIn this systematic review we included clinical studies from 1800 until 2020 to evaluate evidence of the effectiveness of homeopathy on physical and mental conditions in patients during oncological treatment.MethodIn February 2021 a systematic search was conducted searching five electronic databases (Embase, Cochrane, PsychInfo, CINAHL and Medline) to find studies concerning use, effectiveness and potential harm of homeopathy in cancer patients.ResultsFrom all 1352 search results, 18 studies with 2016 patients were included in this SR. The patients treated with homeopathy were mainly diagnosed with breast cancer. The therapy concepts include single and combination homeopathic remedies (used systemically or as mouth rinses) of various dilutions. Outcomes assessed were the influence on toxicity of cancer treatment (mostly hot flashes and menopausal symptoms), time to drain removal in breast cancer patients after mastectomy, survival, quality of life, global health and subjective well-being, anxiety and depression as well as safety and tolerance. The included studies reported heterogeneous results: some studies described significant differences in quality of life or toxicity of cancer treatment favouring homeopathy, whereas others did not find an effect or reported significant differences to the disadvantage of homeopathy or side effects caused by homeopathy. The majority of the studies have a low methodological quality.ConclusionsFor homeopathy, there is neither a scientifically based hypothesis of its mode of action nor conclusive evidence from clinical studies in cancer care.

Abstract licence: CC BY

BackgroundThe clinical benefits of homeopathic preparations (HPs) used in anthroposophic medicine and homeopathy remain a topic of debate. Systematic reviews (SRs), with or without meta-analyses (MAs), that assess the literature in line with scientific standards and account for the complex nature of these interventions are lacking for many health conditions. This project aims to conduct SRs to evaluate the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of HPs for selected patient populations, using a pluralistic approach that considers internal and model validity.MethodsThis protocol follows PRISMA-P. A comprehensive literature search will include the HOMIS database, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, AMED, LILACS, topic-specific sources, citation indices, trial registers, and grey literature, including preprint servers. Eligible studies will have a prospective, longitudinal design and include randomized controlled trials and non-randomized comparative studies published in various languages, evaluating HP interventions for efficacy, effectiveness, and/or safety in health conditions preselected through expert consensus. All patient types, interventions, co-interventions, therapeutic goals, and comparison groups will be eligible. Research questions and outcomes will be developed with consideration of the patient perspective. Each SR will be conducted by a multidisciplinary team, supported by an advisory group. Risk of bias will be assessed using ROB-2 and ROBINS-I. Model validity and the efficacy-effectiveness spectrum will be evaluated using MVHT and RITES. Intervention complexity will be analyzed with an adapted iCAT_SR. Where meta-analysis is not feasible, a narrative synthesis following SWiM will be conducted; otherwise, quantitative synthesis will be performed. Certainty of evidence will be assessed using GRADE.DiscussionThis series of SRs and MAs will investigate the effects of HPs as complex interventions in healthcare and aims to establish an evidence base regarding their efficacy, effectiveness, and safety. By integrating assessments of internal and model validity and potential effect modifiers, the reviews aim to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the conditions under which HPs may yield clinical benefits. In addition, the project may identify research gaps and methodological shortcomings to inform future studies.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD420251017029.

Abstract licence: CC BY

Objectives: In Part 1 of the review of physicochemical research performed on homeopathic preparations the authors identified relevant publications of sufficient reporting quality for further in-depth analysis. In this article, the authors analyze these publications to identify any empirical evidence for specific physicochemical properties of homeopathic preparations and to identify most promising experimental techniques for future studies. Methods: After an update of the literature search up to 2018, the authors analyzed all publications in terms of individual experiments. They extracted information regarding methodological criteria such as blinding, randomization, statistics, controls, sample preparation, and replications, as well as regarding experimental design and measurement methods applied. Scores were developed to identify experimental techniques with most reliable outcomes. Results: The publications analyzed described 203 experiments. Less than 25% used blinding and/or randomization, and about one third used adequate controls to identify specific effects of homeopathic preparations. The most promising techniques used so far are nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) relaxation, optical spectroscopy, and electrical impedance measurements. In these three areas, several sets of replicated high-quality experiments provide evidence for specific physicochemical properties of homeopathic preparations. Conclusions: The authors uncovered a number of promising experimental techniques that warrant replication to assess the reported physicochemical properties of homeopathic preparations compared with controls. They further discuss a range of experimental aspects that highlight the many factors that need to be taken into consideration when performing basic research into homeopathic potentization. For future experiments, the authors generally recommend using succussed (vigorously shaken) controls, or comparing different homeopathic preparations with each other to reliably identify any specific physicochemical properties.

Abstract licence: CC BY