The Red flag! risk assessment among medical homeopaths in Norway: a qualitative study

Probabilistic Reasoning in Homeopathy Practice and its Implications for Clinical Research

The principle of similitude put forward by Hahnemann has challenging practical consequences in the selection of the right homeopathic medicine for a patient. According to this principle, only the medicines that best fit the totality of the symptoms of a given patient are supposed to really cure: this greatly depends on the homeopath's clinical analysis. In addition, a patient's illness may be more or less curable, depending on the characteristics of the disease. In their daily practice, homeopaths typically apply Bayesian reasoning to deal with uncertainty associated with both medicine and disease. We suggest that clinical research on homeopathy would gain by integrating this kind of prior estimation of (1) the probability of a given medicine being effective for that particular patient and (2) the probability of the patient's disease (or symptoms) being curable. We therefore suggest that future trials of N-of-1 design may gain (1) by testing a small number of "best candidate" medicines (instead of one) for a given patient facing a given disease, and (2) by including careful prior estimations of the probabilities that (a) each selected medicine will be efficient for that patient and (b) the patient's disease will be reversible with the medicine.

Efficacy of Individualized Homeopathic Medicines in the Treatment of Atopic Dermatitis in Adults: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Preliminary Trial

INTRODUCTION

Individualized homeopathy (IH) in atopic dermatitis (AD) remained under-researched.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed at evaluating efficacy of IH in AD.

METHODS

A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, short-term, preliminary trial was conducted in an Indian homeopathy hospital. Patients were randomized to either IH (n = 30) or identical-looking placebo (n = 30) using computerized randomization and allocation. Outcomes were patient-oriented scoring of AD (PO-SCORAD; primary end point), Dermatological Life Quality Index (DLQI) score, and AD burden score for adults (ADBSA; secondary end points), measured monthly for 3 months. An intention-to-treat sample was analyzed after adjusting baseline differences.

RESULTS

On PO-SCORAD, improvement was higher in IH against placebo, but nonsignificant statistically (pmonth 1 = 0.433, pmonth 2 = 0.442, pmonth 3 = 0.229). Secondary outcomes were also nonsignificant - both DLQI and ADBSA (p > 0.05). Four adverse events (diarrhea, injury, common cold) were recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a small, but nonsignificant direction of effect towards homeopathy, which renders the trial inconclusive. A properly powered robust trial is indicated.

Paradigm-Specific Risk Conceptions, Patient Safety, and the Regulation of Traditional and Complementary Medicine Practitioners: The Case of Homeopathy in Ontario, Canada

While the principle of risk reduction increasingly underpins health professional regulatory models across the globe, concepts of risk are neither static nor epistemically neutral. Conventional biomedicine's risk conceptions are substantially rooted in principles of scientific materialism, while many traditional and complementary medicine systems have vitalistic epistemic underpinnings that give rise to distinctive safety considerations. The statutory regulation of traditional and complementary medicine providers has been identified by the World Health Organization as a strategy for enhancing public safety. However, complex risk-related questions arise at the intersection of medical epistemologies whose concepts are at best overlapping, and at worst incommensurable. Elaborating a theoretical concept of "paradigm-specific risk conceptions," this work employs Bacchi's poststructural mode of policy analysis ("What's the Problem Represented to Be?") to critically analyze risk discourse in government documents pertaining to the 2015 statutory regulation of homeopathic practitioners in Ontario, Canada. The Ontario government's pre-regulatory risk assessments of the homeopathic occupation discursively emphasized cultural safety principles alongside homeopathy-specific risk conceptions. These paradigm-specific concepts, rooted in homeopathy's epistemic vitalism, extend beyond materialist constructions of adverse events and clinical omission to address potential harms from homeopathic "proving symptoms", "aggravation," and "disruption," all considered implausible from a biomedical standpoint. Although the province's new homeopathy regulator subsequently articulated safety competencies addressing such vitalistic concepts, the tangible risk management strategies ultimately mandated for practitioners exclusively addressed risks consistent with the scientific materialist paradigm. This policy approach substantially echoes the implicit biomedical underpinnings evident in Ontario's broader legislative context, but leaves a significant policy gap regarding the primary safety considerations originally articulated as substantiation for homeopathy's statutory regulation. To optimally preserve patient safety and full informed consent, regulators of traditional and complementary medicine professionals should favor a pragmatic, epistemically-inclusive approach that actively negotiates paradigm-specific risk conceptions from both biomedicine and the occupation under governance.

Combining psychotherapy with craniosacral therapy for severe traumatized patients: A qualitative study from an outpatient clinic in Norway

BACKGROUND

Craniosacral therapy (CST) is an established complementary modality for several health complaints. A clinic for psychosomatics in Norway has included CST into a multimodal treatment approach for severely traumatized patients. The aim of this study was to investigate and describe the indications for the use of craniosacral therapy within trauma therapy. Specifically, to explore treatment philosophy, criteria for improvement, treatment aims, and the evaluation of the risk profile of the multimodal treatment approach.

METHODS

Semi-structured individual interviews (n = 8) and one focus group interview were conducted with the therapists at the Clinic for Psychosomatics, Hospital of Southern Norway, Kristiansand, Norway. The text data were transcribed verbatim, and the analysis of the material was conducted according to conventional and direct content analysis.

RESULTS

The therapists at the clinic applied a holistic treatment approach, based on their understanding of mind and body as one entity. To access emotions and traumata, they used a mixture of different treatment techniques. The therapists experienced patients with severe bodily symptoms as being less cognitively present and attributed this to the symptoms craving most mental resources. The craniosacral therapists' specific aims and task within the multimodal trauma therapy was to ease these physical complaints, so that cognitive and emotional resources could be utilized for therapy. The psychotherapists found that emotions and traumata were more accessible after CST. The general treatment goals were to increase symptom tolerance levels and to enable better self-care. Furthermore, the ability to transform negative behaviors and develop positive alternatives were considered to be signs of improvement.

CONCLUSION

The study participants considered that patients with complex traumas, including post-traumatic stress disorder, seemed to benefit from this multimodal treatment approach and appreciated its' holistic treatment philosophy, including craniosacral therapy. With regard to patient safety, the study participants recommended that craniosacral therapy for severely traumatized patients should only be provided in cooperation with psychotherapists, or other highly qualified health personnel working in specialized institutions.

Mapping the risk perception and communication gap between different professions of healthcare providers in cancer care: a cross-sectional protocol

INTRODUCTION

Studies show that patients with cancer who use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) have a poorer survival prognosis than those who do not. It remains unclear whether this is due to a priori poorer prognosis that makes patients turn to CAM, or whether there is a factor associated with CAM use itself that influences the prognosis negatively. Healthcare providers should assist patients in safeguarding their treatment decision. However, the current non-communication between CAM and conventional providers leaves it up to the patients themselves to choose how to best integrate the two worlds of therapy. In this study, an interactive shared decision-making (SDM) tool will be developed to enable patients and health professionals to make safe health choices.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will delineate, compare and evaluate perception and clinical experience of communication of risk situations among oncology experts, general practitioners and CAM practitioners. To accomplish this, we will develop a pilot and implement a large-scale survey among the aforementioned health professionals in Norway. Guided by the survey results, we will develop a β-version of a shared decision-making tool for healthcare providers to use in guiding patients to make safe CAM decisions.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Participants must give their informed and written consent before inclusion. They will be informed about the opportunity to drop out from the study followed by deletion of all data registered. The study needs no approval from The Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics because all participants are healthcare professionals. Results from this study will be disseminated in peer-reviewed medical journals.

Risk in homeopathy: Classification of adverse events and homeopathic aggravations--A cross sectional study among Norwegian homeopath patients

The registration of adverse events is important to identify treatment that might impose risk to patients. Homeopathic aggravation, a concept unique for homeopathy may impose a particular risk, as it is tolerant towards a worsening of the patients' symptoms. The aim of this study was to explore the classification of patient reported reactions as homeopathic aggravations or adverse drug reactions.

DESIGN AND SETTING

In a cross sectional survey, patients were asked to register any reactions they had experienced 14 days after taking homeopathic remedies. Worsening of symptoms was classified as homeopathic aggravation if it was (i) an increase of the patients' existing symptoms (ii) and/or a feeling of well-being that emerged 1-3 days after taking the remedy (iii) and/or headache and/or fatigue accompanying these symptoms.

RESULTS

A total of 26% of the participants reported worsening of symptoms. One third was classified as adverse events. Half of these were graded as minor and the other half as moderate according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. Two thirds were classified as homeopathic aggravations. Of these, 73% were classified as minor and 27% as moderate, giving a tendency towards milder severity for those classified as homeopathic aggravations (p=0.065).

CONCLUSION

Patients reported a substantial part of the short-term reactions after taking homeopathic remedy as a worsening of symptoms. These reactions were classified as mild and moderate. Hence, the risk connected to homeopathic treatment is minor. More studies are needed to confirm the existence of homeopathic aggravation and how to classify the concept in a clinically meaningful way.

How to handle worsening of condition during treatment - risk assessment in homeopathic practice

Even though homeopathy is regarded as a harmless intervention, homeopathic practice may not be entirely risk-free. Risk in homeopathy can be divided into direct and indirect risk. Direct risk refers to traditional adverse effects of an intervention; indirect risk is related to adverse effects in a treatment context, e.g. the practitioner. Available data suggest that the risk profile of homeopathic remedies in ultra-molecular potencies is minor, but there is a potential for indirect risk related to homeopathic practice. The concept of 'homeopathic aggravation' which is unique for homeopathy may impose a particular risk as it allows the health status of the patients to deteriorate before there is a possible improvement. In that respect it is imperative to distinguish homeopathic aggravations from adverse effects. In a general risk evaluation of the homeopathic treatment it may be useful to assess the patient's symptoms in accordance with the natural course of disease and to evaluate any negative deviation from the normal curve as a possible adverse effect of the treatment. It is imperative that more emphasis is placed on patient safety during the education in homeopathy, and that students are trained to identify serious and red flag situations.

Towards improving the reporting quality of clinical case reports in complementary medicine: assessing and illustrating the need for guideline development

BACKGROUND

Case reports have had a varying level of recognition as a source of evidence throughout the history of medicine. In recent years, there has been a revival of interest in clinical case reports in both conventional and complementary medicine. There is a need to further improve the reporting quality of clinical case reports of different Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) therapies.

OBJECTIVES

To provide an overview of the different objectives for clinical case reports, identify those that are most relevant for CAM, and to develop a conceptual framework for purpose orientated clinical case reporting guidelines for CAM therapies. To practically illustrate the chosen approach by developing a clinical case reporting guideline for homeopathic cases.

METHODS

The various objectives of clinical case reports were described by Prof. Milos Jenicek, and the potential relevance of these objectives for CAM were discussed and graded by a mixed panel of experts. A conceptual framework for developing clinical case reporting guidelines for CAM treatments with specific objectives is proposed. The aim is to integrate both 'generic' and 'CAM therapy specific' quality items. This framework has been practically applied to the development of a reporting guideline for clinical case reports in homoeopathy which will be reported in a second article.

RESULTS

An overview is given of the clinical case reporting literature. The conceptual framework for the development of purpose orientated CAM clinical case reporting guidelines is presented. This framework is based on alignment with the recently published 'generic' CARE guideline for reporting of clinical case reports, whilst addressing the CAM specific elements at the same time.

CONCLUSIONS

The scope and importance of clinical case reporting guideline development in CAM is illustrated. A conceptual framework for developing CAM specific clinical case reporting guidelines was established. It has been implemented using homoeopathy as an illustration, and this will be reported in a separate article. Further improvements in clinical case reporting in CAM will greatly contribute to CAM research and education, as well as to improved patient care.