Research - Lower Back Pain
__The efficacy and safety of a homeopathic gel in the treatment of acute low back pain: a multicentre, randomised, double-blind comparative clinical trial
C Stam1*, MS Bonnet2 and RA van Haselen3
1Regulatory Affairs Department, VSM Geneesmiddelen bv, Alkmaar, The Netherlands; 2Avon Prior, Keynsham, Bristol, UK; and
3The Royal London Homoeopathic Hospital NHS Trust, London, UK
Abstract
Acute low back pain is a very common condition in Western industrialised countries. In most cases analgesics or topical medications are prescribed at first encounter with the general practitioner (GP).
The aim of this study was to investigate whether the homeopathic gel Spiro¯or SRL1 gel (SRL) is equally effective and better tolerated than Cremor Capsici Compositus FNA (CCC) in patients with acute low back pain.
A multi-centre, randomised, double-blind, controlled clinical trial was conducted in the practices of 19 GPs in the districts of Bristol and Manchester, UK. One hundred and sixty-one subjects suffering from acute low back pain were treated for one week either with SRL or with CCC. Pain was scored on a 100mm visual analogue scale (VAS). Main efficacy parameter VAS reduction was compared between treatments. Evaluation of safety was primarily based on the number of subjects with adverse events (AEs),
withdrawals due to an AE and adverse drug reactions (ADRs).
The mean difference between the VAS reduction in the SRL group and the CCC group adjusted for VAS at baseline and age was ÿ0.6mm (90%CIˆÿ6.5 ± 5.3 mm). Fewer subjects in the SRL group (11%) experienced an AE than in the CCC group (26%). The same applies to the number of subjects with an ADR (3=81ˆ4% vs 18=74ˆ24%) and the number of subjects withdrawn due to an ADR (0=81ˆ0% vs 8=74ˆ11%).
In conclusion, SRL and CCC are equally effective in the treatment of acute low back pain, however, SRL has a better safety pro®le. Spiro¯or SRL1 gel is preferable to Capsicum-based products for the topical treatment of low back pain, because of the lower risk of adverse effects.
Source : BritishHomeopathic Journal (2001) 90, 21±28
Link to Full Article
The Efficacy of homeopathy in the treatment of chronic low back pain compared to standardized physiotherapy
Gmünder R, Kissling R.
Abteilung für Physikalische Medizin und Rheumatologie, Orthopädische Universitätsklinik Balgrist, Zürich, Switzerland.
Abstract
AIM: The aim of this pilot project was to evaluate the efficacy of treatment of chronic low back pain during two months either by homeopathy or by standardised physiotherapy.
METHOD: 43 patients suffering from chronic low back pain were included in this controlled, randomised prospective study. They were divided in two treatment groups: homeopathy and standardised physiotherapy. Based on the initial and final clinical investigations, the Oswestry questionnaire and the visual analogue scale, that were assessed at the beginning, at the end and 18.5 months after therapy, the results were statistically evaluated. A further questionnaire documented the acceptance of treatment.
RESULTS: A comparison of the groups from the beginning to the end of treatment reveals a significant decrease of the Oswestry score in patients treated by homeopathy. This tendency could not be confirmed 18.5 months later. Homeopathy was well accepted by most of the patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on these results, nothing can be said against attempting treatment of chronic low back pain by means of homeopathy. Further research is recommended to confirm the results of our investigation, using a larger number of patients, a third treatment group, homeopathy double blinded.
Source : Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb. 2002 Sep-Oct;140(5):503-8
Link to Abstract
C Stam1*, MS Bonnet2 and RA van Haselen3
1Regulatory Affairs Department, VSM Geneesmiddelen bv, Alkmaar, The Netherlands; 2Avon Prior, Keynsham, Bristol, UK; and
3The Royal London Homoeopathic Hospital NHS Trust, London, UK
Abstract
Acute low back pain is a very common condition in Western industrialised countries. In most cases analgesics or topical medications are prescribed at first encounter with the general practitioner (GP).
The aim of this study was to investigate whether the homeopathic gel Spiro¯or SRL1 gel (SRL) is equally effective and better tolerated than Cremor Capsici Compositus FNA (CCC) in patients with acute low back pain.
A multi-centre, randomised, double-blind, controlled clinical trial was conducted in the practices of 19 GPs in the districts of Bristol and Manchester, UK. One hundred and sixty-one subjects suffering from acute low back pain were treated for one week either with SRL or with CCC. Pain was scored on a 100mm visual analogue scale (VAS). Main efficacy parameter VAS reduction was compared between treatments. Evaluation of safety was primarily based on the number of subjects with adverse events (AEs),
withdrawals due to an AE and adverse drug reactions (ADRs).
The mean difference between the VAS reduction in the SRL group and the CCC group adjusted for VAS at baseline and age was ÿ0.6mm (90%CIˆÿ6.5 ± 5.3 mm). Fewer subjects in the SRL group (11%) experienced an AE than in the CCC group (26%). The same applies to the number of subjects with an ADR (3=81ˆ4% vs 18=74ˆ24%) and the number of subjects withdrawn due to an ADR (0=81ˆ0% vs 8=74ˆ11%).
In conclusion, SRL and CCC are equally effective in the treatment of acute low back pain, however, SRL has a better safety pro®le. Spiro¯or SRL1 gel is preferable to Capsicum-based products for the topical treatment of low back pain, because of the lower risk of adverse effects.
Source : BritishHomeopathic Journal (2001) 90, 21±28
Link to Full Article
The Efficacy of homeopathy in the treatment of chronic low back pain compared to standardized physiotherapy
Gmünder R, Kissling R.
Abteilung für Physikalische Medizin und Rheumatologie, Orthopädische Universitätsklinik Balgrist, Zürich, Switzerland.
Abstract
AIM: The aim of this pilot project was to evaluate the efficacy of treatment of chronic low back pain during two months either by homeopathy or by standardised physiotherapy.
METHOD: 43 patients suffering from chronic low back pain were included in this controlled, randomised prospective study. They were divided in two treatment groups: homeopathy and standardised physiotherapy. Based on the initial and final clinical investigations, the Oswestry questionnaire and the visual analogue scale, that were assessed at the beginning, at the end and 18.5 months after therapy, the results were statistically evaluated. A further questionnaire documented the acceptance of treatment.
RESULTS: A comparison of the groups from the beginning to the end of treatment reveals a significant decrease of the Oswestry score in patients treated by homeopathy. This tendency could not be confirmed 18.5 months later. Homeopathy was well accepted by most of the patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on these results, nothing can be said against attempting treatment of chronic low back pain by means of homeopathy. Further research is recommended to confirm the results of our investigation, using a larger number of patients, a third treatment group, homeopathy double blinded.
Source : Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb. 2002 Sep-Oct;140(5):503-8
Link to Abstract