Su 1016 pazienti con malattie respiratorie acute l'Antroposofia č pių efficace della medicina convenzionale ed ha meno eventi avversi  [19.04.2007]

Notizia, adattamento e commento a cura di Andrea Valeri, responsabile del Dipartimento di ricerca clinica della Società Italiana di Medicina Omeopatica.  avaleri11@libero.it

Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2005 Apr;117(7-8):256-68.


Anthroposophic vs. conventional therapy of acute respiratory and ear infections: a prospective outcomes study.

Hamre HJ, Fischer M, Heger M, Riley D, Haidvogl M, Baars E, Bristol E, Evans M,

Schwarz R, Kiene H.Institute for Applied Epistemology and Medical Methodology, Freiburg, Germany.harald.hamre@ifaemm.de


CONTEXT: Acute respiratory and ear symptoms are frequently treated with

antibiotics. Anthroposophic treatment of these symptoms relies primarily on

anthroposophic medications. OBJECTIVE: To compare anthroposophic treatment to

conventional treatment of acute respiratory and ear symptoms regarding clinical

outcome, medication use and safety, and patient satisfaction. DESIGN:

Prospective, non-randomised comparison of outcomes in patients self-selected to

anthroposophic or conventional therapy under real-world conditions. SETTING: 29

primary care practices in Austria, Germany, Netherlands, UK, and USA.


PARTICIPANTS AND THERAPY: 1016 consecutive outpatients aged > or = 1 month,

consulting an anthroposophic (n = 715 A-patients) or conventional physician (n =

301 C-patients) with a chief complaint of acute (< or = 7 days) sore throat, ear

pain, sinus pain, runny nose or cough. Patients were treated according to the

physician's discretion.


PRIMARY OUTCOME: Patients' self-report of treatment

outcome (complete recovery/major improvement/slight to moderate improvement/no

change/deterioration) at Day 14. RESULTS: Most common chief complaints were

cough (39.9% of A-patients vs. 33.9% of C-patients, p = 0.0772), sore throat

(26.3% vs. 23.3%, p=0.3436), and ear pain (20.0% vs. 18.9%, p=0.7302). Baseline

chief complaint severity was severe or very severe in 60.5% of A-patients and

53.3% of C-patients (p=0.0444), mean severity (0-4) of complaint-related

symptoms was 1.3 +/- 0.7 vs. 1.2 +/- 0.6 (p=0.5197). During the 28-day follow-up

antibiotics were prescribed to 5.5% of A-patients and 33.6% of C-patients

(p<0.0001), anthroposophic medicines were prescribed to all A-patients and no

C-patient.

OUTCOMES: Improvement within 24 hours occurred in 30.9% (221/715) of

A-patients and 16.6% (50/301) of C-patients (p<0.0001), improvement within 3

days in 73.1% and 57.1% (p<0.0001). At Day 7 complete recovery or major

improvement was reported by 77.1% of A-patients and 66.1% of C-patients

(p=0.0004), at Day 14 by 89.7% and 84.4% (p=0.0198). Complete recovery rates at

Day 7 were 30.5% and 23.3% (p<0.0001); at Day 14 they were 64.2% and 49.5%

(p<0.0001). 69.9% of A-patients and 60.5% of C-patients were very satisfied with

their physician (p=0.0043); 95.7% and 83.4% would choose the same therapy again

for their chief complaint (p<0.0001). After adjustment for country, gender, age,

chief complaint, duration of complaint, previous episode of complaint within

last year, and baseline symptom severity, odds ratios favoured the A-group for

all these outcomes. Adverse drug reactions were reported in 2.7% of A-patients

and 6.0% of C-patients (p=0.0157).


CONCLUSION: Compared to conventional treatment, anthroposophic treatment of primary care patients with acute respiratory and ear symptoms had more favourable outcomes, lower antibiotic prescription rates, less adverse drug reactions, and higher patient satisfaction.

link all' Abstract:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=15926617&query_hl=6&itool=pubmed_docsum 

 

[invia per email]