AUTHORS
C Becker-Witt, T Keil, S Roll, D Menke, W Vance, K Wegscheider, SN Willich
Institute for Social Medicine, Epidemiology, and Health Economics, Hospital Charité, Humboldt University of Berlin, Germany

BIOGRAPHY
Dr. Claudia Becker-Witt studied medicine at Freie Universität in Berlin and Ruhr Universität in Bochum. Since 1992 her professional focus has been on the therapeutic and scientific aspects of homeopathy. In addition, she has had special training in epidemiology and statistics. In 1999 she completed her doctoral studies and, in the year 2000, received the Karl and Veronica Carstens Foundation research prize for her doctoral thesis on "Physical research in homeopathy". Since 1997 she has been head of the Complementary Medicine Working Group at the Institute of Social Medicine, Epidemiology, and Health Economics, which is part of the Charité University Medical Center in Berlin, Germany. In this capacity, she is responsible for both research and teaching policies in Complementary Medicine. Of chief interest in her own research are clinical and epidemiological studies of homeopathy and acupuncture.

ABSTRACT

Objective:

To evaluate the effectiveness and costs of homeopathic treatment compared to conventional treatment in primary care.

Material and methods:

In a prospective cohort study, patients with chronic diseases (adults: low back pain, headache, insomnia, major depression, chronic sinusitis; children: allergic rhinitis, asthma, atopic eczema) were recruited from homeopathic and conventional practitioners. Patients were monitored at baseline, 6 and 12 months using standardised questionnaires. The severity of complaints was assessed independently by patients and physicians on visual rating scales (0-10). Cost data were provided by the health insurance companies. Analyses were conducted using General Linear Models.

Results:

A total of 493 patients were included in the study: 315 adults (22% men, 78% women, mean age 45±13 years) and 178 children [60% boys, 40% girls, mean age 6.8 ± 4 years]). Children treated with homeopathic medicine improved significantly compared to those treated conventionally, both according to patient self-assessment (Homeopathy/Conventional0/12 months H:5.0/2.6; C:4.4./3.2; p<0.01) and physician assessment (H:4.5/2.0; C:3.9/2.7; p<0.01).

Adults in the homeopathic treatment group also improved significantly compared to those in the conventional treatment group according to self-assessment (H:5.6/3.2; C:5.9/4.4; p<0.01), whereas physician assessment yielded no difference (H:5.8/2.6; C:6.2/3.4; p=ns). No significant differences in costs were observed.

Conclusions:

In terms of effectiveness, homeopathic treatment was equal and, to some extent, superior to conventional treatment. The costs of both forms of therapy were similar.