Search

Background/Objective During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, several homeopathic prognostic factor research (PFR) projects have been undertaken. We found two projects with comparable outcomes to assess consistency and possible flaws. Methods Two comparisons were made. (1) Outcome of a PFR data collection from the Liga Medicorum Homoeopathica Internationalis (LMHI) by about 100 doctors with 541 cases was compared with a previous analysis of 161 cases in the same database. (2) The updated LMHI database was also compared with a data collection carried out in India by four doctors with a total of 1,445 cases. Differences that resulted in conflicting outcomes (indication in one, contraindication in the other) were examined for possible causes. Results There was only a single outcome in the updated LMHI database that conflicted with the previous dataset, and this could have been due to statistical variation. The Indian data contained many cases, from few doctors, while the LMHI database had few cases per doctor, but many doctors. The overlap between the projects (individual cases entered in both) was between zero and 22%. In 72 comparisons we found six (8.3%) conflicting outcomes. Possible causes were statistical error due to small numbers of cases and/or observers, confirmation bias, and keynote prescribing if this resulted in symptoms being inadequately checked. Conclusion There was little conflict between the outcomes of the two versions of one project and between the two different PFR projects. Differences could mostly be explained by causes that can be managed. This consistency should primarily be interpreted as showing a strong overall consensus between homeopathic practitioners worldwide, but with variation of consensus between small groups of practitioners.

Background Signaling molecules such as cytokines and interleukins are key mediators for the immune response in responding to internal or external stimuli. Homeopathically prepared signaling molecules have been used therapeutically for about five decades. However, these types of products are not available in many countries and their usage by homoeopaths is also infrequent. The aim of this scoping review is to map the available pre-clinical and clinical data related to the therapeutic use of homeopathically prepared signaling molecules. Methods We conducted a scoping review of clinical and pre-clinical studies of therapeutically used signaling molecules that have been prepared in accordance with an officially recognized homeopathic pharmacopoeia. Articles in peer-reviewed journals reporting original clinical or pre-clinical research of homeopathically prepared signaling molecules such as interleukins, cytokines, antibodies, growth factors, neuropeptides and hormones, were eligible. Non-English language papers were excluded, unless we were able to obtain an English translation. An appraisal of eligible studies took place by rating the direction of the outcomes on a five-point scale. The quality of the papers was not systematically assessed. Results Twenty-eight eligible papers, reporting findings for four different manufacturers' products, were identified and reviewed. Seventeen papers reported pre-clinical studies, and 11 reported clinical studies (six experimental, five observational). A wide range of signaling molecules, as well as normal T-cell expressed specific nucleic acids, were used. A majority of the products (21 of 28) contained two or more signaling molecules. The most common clinical indications were psoriasis, vitiligo, rheumatoid arthritis, respiratory allergies, polycystic ovary syndrome, and herpes. The direction of the outcomes was positive in 26 papers and unclear in two papers. Conclusion This scoping review found that there is a body of evidence on the use of homeopathically prepared signaling molecules. From a homeopathy perspective, these substances appear to have therapeutic potential. Further steps to explore this potential are warranted.

Background Prognostic factor research (PFR), prevalence of symptoms and likelihood ratio (LR) play an important role in identifying prescribing indications of useful homeopathic remedies. It involves meticulous unbiased collection and analysis of data collected during clinical practice. This paper is an attempt to identify causes of bias and suggests ways to mitigate them for improving the accuracy in prescribing for better clinical outcomes and execution of randomized controlled studies. Methods A prospective, open label, observational study was performed from April 2020 to December 2020 at two COVID Health Centers. A custom-made Excel spreadsheet containing 71 fields covering a spectrum of COVID-19 symptoms was shared with doctors for regular reporting. Cases suitable for PFR were selected. LR was calculated for commonly occurring symptoms. Outlier values with LR ≥5 were identified and variance of LRs was calculated. Results Out of 1,889 treated cases of confirmed COVID-19, 1,445 cases were selected for pre-specified reasons. Nine medicines, Arsenicum album, Bryonia alba, Gelsemium sempervirens, Pulsatilla nigricans, Hepar sulphuricus, Magnesia muriaticum, Phosphorus, Nux vomica and Belladonna, were most frequently prescribed. Outlier values and large variance for Hepar sulphuricus and Magnesia muriaticum were noticed as indication of bias. Confirmation bias leading to lowering of symptom threshold, keynote prescribing, and deficiency in checking of all symptoms in each case were identified as the most important sources of bias. Conclusion Careful identification of biases and remedial steps such as training of doctors, regular monitoring of data, checking of all pre-defined symptoms, and multicenter data collection are important steps to mitigate biases.

Background/Objective Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a new disease; its clinical profile and natural history are evolving. Each well-recorded case in homeopathic practice is important for deciding the future course of action. This study aims at identifying clinically useful homeopathic remedies and their prescribing symptoms using the prognostic factor research model.Methods This was an open-label, multi-centric, observational study performed from April 2020 to July 2020 at various public health care clinics. The data were collected prospectively from clinical practice at integrated COVID-19 care facilities in India. Good-quality cases were selected using a specific set of criteria. These cases were analyzed for elucidating prognostic factors by calculating the likelihood ratio (LR) of each frequently occurring symptom. The symptoms with high LR values (>1) were considered as prescribing indications of the specific remedy.Results Out of 327 COVID-19 cases reported, 211 met the selection criteria for analysis. The most common complaints were fatigue, sore throat, dry cough, myalgia, fever, dry mouth and throat, increased thirst, headache, decreased appetite, anxiety, and altered taste. Twenty-seven remedies were prescribed and four of them—Arsenicum album, Bryonia alba, Gelsemium sempervirens, and Pulsatilla nigricans—were the most frequently used. A high LR was obtained for certain symptoms, which enabled differentiation between the remedies for a given patient.Conclusion Homeopathic medicines were associated with improvement in symptoms of COVID-19 cases. Characteristic symptoms of four frequently indicated remedies have been identified using prognostic factor research, findings that can contribute to accurate homeopathic prescribing during future controlled research in COVID-19.

Objective The aim of the study was to identify indicated homeopathic remedies based on the clinical characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in India. Methods In this retrospective, cohort study, confirmed COVID-19 patients admitted at a COVID Health Centre in New Delhi between April 29 and June 17, 2020 were given conventional and homeopathic treatment. Patients were grouped into mild, moderate or severe categories of disease. Their symptomatologic profiles were analyzed to identify indicated homeopathic medicines. Results A total of 196 COVID-19 patients were admitted. One hundred and seventy-eight patients had mild symptoms; eighteen patients had moderate symptoms; no patients with severe symptoms were included as they were referred to tertiary care centers with ventilatory support. The mean age of patients with mild symptoms was significantly lower (38.6 years; standard deviation or SD ± 15.8) compared with patients in the moderate category (66.0 years; SD ± 9.09). The most important symptoms identified were fever (43.4%), cough (47.4%), sore throat (29.6%), headache (18.4%), myalgia (17.9%), fatigue (16.8%), chest discomfort (13.8%), chills (12.6%), shortness of breath (11.2%) and loss of taste (10.2%). Twenty-eight homeopathic medicines were prescribed, the most frequently indicated being Bryonia alba (33.3%), Arsenicum album (18.1%), Pulsatilla nigricans (13.8%), Nux vomica (8%), Rhus toxicodendron (7.2%) and Gelsemium sempervirens (5.8%), in 30C potency. Conclusion Data from the current study reveal that Arsenicum album, Bryonia alba, Pulsatilla nigricans, Nux vomica, Rhus toxicodendron and Gelsemium sempervirens are the most frequently indicated homeopathic medicines. A randomized controlled clinical trial based on this finding is the next step.

COVID-19 has affected over 24 million patients with over 8 lacs deaths worldwide. Till date, no specific drug or vaccine has been proven effective for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 patients. In a recent observational cohort study conducted at Delhi Government designated COVID hospital on 221 patients, important facts have emerged indicating the benefits of using unconventional treatment protocol (consisting of combination of homeopathic medicines, allopathic medicines & non-pharmacological interventions) in COVID-19 situation. The interdisciplinary team of doctors and scientists have found that out of 221 COVID-19 positive patients (diagnosed with RT-PCR), 169 patients were clinically classified as patients of mild category and 21 were labeled as moderate whereas 31 patients were asymptomatic. 170 patients were treated with either homeopathic medicines, allopathic medicines or the combination of both. The unconventional treatment protocol combining homeopathic medicines and allopathic systems showed rapid improvement in clinical condition. We found that fever (temperature) was reduced to normal on an average of 7.45 ± 5.19 days. The treatment outcome of this study showed better results when compared with control datasets obtained from independent studies published earlier. All the patients were discharged on an average of 9.29 ± 3.52 days. The mortality rate was zero and there were no adverse events for the patients. Apart from temperature and fever, symptoms such as cough, sore throat, myalgia, & dyspnea also improved significantly in the patients enrolled in this study. The average time for clinical improvement was significantly better than previously published clinical studies on COVID-19 patients in independent hospitals. This study indicates that the use of unconventional treatment protocol can emerge as an effective treatment option for COVID-19 patients. Despite the challenges (i.e. limited availability of high quality clinical data), we generated a machine learning model for semi-automated prediction of potential treatments (i.e. medicines, non-pharmacological interventions) that should be prescribed to the patient based on the time dependent clinical features, comorbidities, & demographic profiling. Further, efforts are underway to include additional clinical data from COVID19 patients to provide a robust and accurate machine learning based prescription system.