Expectations and effectiveness of medical treatment and classical homeopathic treatment for patients with hypersensitivity illnesses—One year prospective study

Laila Launsø; Inge Henningsen; Jonas Rieper; Henriette Brender; Finn Sandø; Anne Hvenegaard

doi:10.1016/j.homp.2007.08.011

Homeopathy, Table of Contents

Homeopathy 2007; 96(04): 233-242
DOI: 10.1016/j.homp.2007.08.011

Original Paper

Expectations and effectiveness of medical treatment and classical homeopathic treatment for patients with hypersensitivity illnesses—One year prospective study

Laila Launsø

¹National Research Center in Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NAFKAM), University of Tromsø, Norway

,

Inge Henningsen

²Department of Applied Mathematics and Statistics, Institute of Mathematics, University of Copenhagen, Denmark

,

Jonas Rieper

³Centre in Bridge Building in Health Care, Teglgårdstræde 4, 1452 Copenhagen, Denmark

,

Henriette Brender

³Centre in Bridge Building in Health Care, Teglgårdstræde 4, 1452 Copenhagen, Denmark

,

Finn Sandø

⁴Institute of Sociology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

,

Anne Hvenegaard

⁵Danish Institute for Health Services Research, Dampfærgevej 27-29, P.O. Box 2595, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark

› Author Affiliations
Subject Editor:

Abstract

Objective: To describe and compare characteristics of adult patients who received treatment for hypersensitivity illnesses by general practitioners (GPs) and classical homeopaths (CHs) over a period of 1 year and examine the statistical predictors of self-reported treatment outcomes.

Material and methods: We conducted a survey on 151 Danish adult patients with hypersensitivity illnesses, who chose treatment from one of 13 GPs or one of 10 CHs who participated in the project. The treatments were given as individual packages in the naturalistic clinical setting. Patients completed questionnaires at start of treatment, after 6 months and a year after start of treatment. Response rates for the first, second and third questionnaire were respectively 68%, 98%, 95% for the GP patients and 82%, 98%, 94% for the CH patients.

Results: Patients seeking CH treatment in this study are significantly different in gender and education from patients seeking GP treatment. We did not find significant differences in terms of occupational training, occupation, sickness absence due to hypersensitivity illnesses, diseases other than hypersensitivity illnesses, symptoms severity due to hypersensitivity illnesses before treatment and expectation of the ability of the treatment to alleviate symptoms.

Eighty-eight percent of GP and 21% of CH patients were continuing treatment after 1 year. Regression analysis showed that the only significant independent variables to explain the probability of obtaining very positive effect or cure for GPs and CHs were that the patients were in ‘maintenance treatment’, and had high expectation before treatment of the ability of the treatment to relieve their symptoms.

Conclusion: In this study self-reported very positive effect of GP treatment and very positive effect and cure of CH treatment are associated with the patients’ high expectation of the treatment and continuation of maintenance treatment.

Keywords

prospective study - user-evaluation study - outcome assessment - health care - cure

Full Text

References

References
1 Launsø L. The use of alternative practitioners (In Danish: Brugen af alternative behandlere). Nordisk Med 1981; 96: 177-180.
2 Launsø L. People choose Alternative Therapies! Consequences for future pharmacy practice. J Soc Admin Pharmacy 1995; 12 (01) 43-52.
3 Launsø L. The use of alternative treatments in Denmark: patterns of use and patients’ experience with treatment effects. Altern Ther Health Med 2000; 6 (01) 102-107.
4 Rasmussen NK, Groth MV, Bredkjær SR, et al. Health and Morbidity in Denmark 1987. (In Danish: Sundhed og sygelighed i Danmark 1987). København: DIKE 1988.
5 Eisenberg D.M., Kessler R.C., Foster C., Norlock F.E., Calkins D.R., Delbanco T.L. Unconventional medicine in the United-States—prevalence, costs, and patterns of use. New Engl J Med 1993; 328 (04) 246-252.
6 Eisenberg D.M., Davis R.B., Ettner S.L. et al. Trends in alternative medicine use in the United States, 1990–1997—results of a follow-up national survey. J Am Med Assoc 1998; 280 (18) 1569-1575.
7 Fisher P., Ward A. Complementary medicine in Europe. Br Med J 1994; 309: 107-111.
8 Kjøller M, Rasmussen NK, Keiding L, et al. Health and Morbidity in Denmark in 1994—and the development since 1987 (In Danish: Sundhed og sygelighed i Danmark 1994 – og udviklingen siden 1987.) København: DIKE 1995.
9 Kessler R.C., Davis R.B., Foster F.D. et al. Long-term trends in the use of complementary and alternative medical therapies in the United States. Ann Intern Med 2001; 135: 262-268.
10 NCCAM. 2004. The use of complementary and alternative medicine in the United States. NCCAM, NIH.⟨ http://nccam.nih.gov/health/updated September 2004⟩.
11 Hanssen B., Grimsgaard S., Launsø L., Fønnebø V., Falkenberg T., Rasmussen N.K. Use of complementary and alternative medicine in the Scandinavian countries. Scand J Prim Health 2005; 23: 57-62.
12 Lønroth H.L., Ekholm O. Alternative treatment in Denmark—The Use, Users and Reasons for Use. (In Danish: Alternativ behandling I Danmark—brug, brugere og årsager til brug). Ugeskrift for Læger 2006; 168 (07) 682-686.
13 Ekholm O., Kjøller M. The use of alternative treatment in Denmark. (In Danish: Brugen af alternative behandling i Danmark). Tidsskrift for Forskning i Sygdom og Samfund 2007; 6: 15-24.
14 Østvold K. The Youth Chose Alternative Treatment (In Norwegian: Ungdommen vælger alternativt). The National Information Center on Alternative Treatment (NIFAB), NAFKAM, University of Tromsø, Norway. ⟨ www.nifab.no ⟩ (updated 25.5.2007).
15 Ernst E. Complementary therapies for asthma: what patients use. J Asthma 1998; 35 (08) 667-671.
16 Andersen HE. A Study on Classical Homeopathy. Theories, Practice and User Experiences. (In Danish: En undersøgelse af klassisk homøopati. Teorier, praksis og brugererfaringer.) Frederiksværk: Dansk Selskab for Klassisk Homøopati, 1999.
17 Schafer T., Riehle A., Wichmann H.E., Ring J. Alternative medicine in allergies—prevalence, patterns of use, and costs. Allergy 2002; 57 (08) 694-700.
18 Lewith G.T., Watkins A.D. Unconventional therapies in asthma: an overview. Allergy 1996; 51 (11) 761-769.
19 Linde K., Jobst K.A. Homeopathy for chronic asthma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000 02 CD000353.
20 McCarney RW, Linde K, Lasserson TJ. Homeopathy for chronic asthma. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006. Issue 1. Art. No.: CD000353. Doi:10.1002/14651858. CD000353. pub2.
21 Witt C.M., Ludtke R., Baur R., Willich S.N. Homeopathic medical practice: long-term results of a cohort study with 3981 patients. BMC Public Health 2005; 3 (05) 115.
22 Riley D., Fischer M., Singh B. Homeopathy and conventional medicine: an outcomes study comparing effectiveness in a primary care setting. J Altern Complem Med 2001; 7 (02) 149-159.
23 Launsø L., Kimby C.K., Henningsen I., Fønnebø V. An explorative retrospective study of people suffering from hypersensitivity illnesses who attend medical or classical homeopathic treatment. Homeopathy 2006; 95 (02) 73-80.
24 Launsø L., Rieper J. General practitioners’ and classical homeopaths’ treatment models for asthma and allergy. Homeopathy 2005; 94: 17-25.
25 Launsø L, Gannik DE. The need for revision of medical research designs. In: Gannik DE, Launsø L (eds). Disease, Knowledge and Society. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur, 2000.
26 Scocozza L. The randomized trial. A critique from the philosophy of science. In: Gannik DE, Launsø L (eds). Disease, Knowledge and Society. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur, 2000.
27 Lewith G., Thomas K., Fønnbø V. Whole System Research in Cancer Care—Report of Meeting in Tromso (Sommarøy), 14–16 September 2005. Complem Ther Med 2006; 14: 157-164.
28 Guthlin C., Lange O., Walach H. Measuring the effects of acupuncture and homoeopathy in general practice: an uncontrolled prospective documentation approach. BMC Public Health 2004; 4: 6.
29 Fønnebø V., Grimsgaard S., Walach H. et al. Researching complementary and alternative treatments-the gatekeepers are not at home. BMC Med Res Methodol 2007; 7: 7 10.1186/1471-2288-7-7
30 Grøn L. Winds of change, bodies of persistence. Health Promotion and Lifestyle Changes in Institutional and Everyday Contexts. Aarhus and Vejle County, DK: Department of Anthropology and Ethnography and Department of Health, 2004.
31 Witt C.M., Keil T., Selin D. et al. Outcome and costs of homeopathic and conventional treatment strategies: A comparative cohort study in patients with chronic disorders. Complment Ther Med 2005; 13 (02) 79-86.
32 Trichard M., Chaufferin G., Nicoloyannis N. Pharmacoeconomic comparison between homeopathic and antibiotic treatment strategies in recurrent acute rhinopharyngitis in children. Homeopathy 2005; 94 (01) 3-9.
33 Hacke M., Hvenegaard A. Health Econonomy Analysis of Asthma/Allergy Treatment by Conventional Medicine and Classical Homeopathy (In Danish: Sundhedsøkonomisk analyse af astma/allergibehandling med lægemidler og klassisk homøopati). Copenhagen: DSI, Institut for Sundhedsvæsen; 2005.
34 Hosmer Jr. D.W., Lemeshow S. Applied Logistic Regression. New York: Wiley; 1989.