Frei H, Everts R, von Ammon K, Kaufmann F, Walther D, Schmitz S-F Hsu, Collenberg M, Steinlin M, Lim C, Thurneysen A
Swiss Association of Homeopathic Physicians, Lucerne, Switzerland.
Homeopathy. 2007 Jan;96(1):35-41. doi: 10.1016/j.homp.2006.11.004.
Treatment of patients with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) with homeopathy is difficult. The Swiss randomised, placebo controlled, cross-over trial in ADHD patients (Swiss ADHD trial) was designed with an open-label screening phase prior to the randomised controlled phase. During the screening phase, the response of each child to successive homeopathic medications was observed until the optimal medication was identified. Only children who reached a predefined level of improvement participated in the randomised, cross-over phase. Although the randomised phase revealed a significant beneficial effect of homeopathy, the cross-over caused a strong carryover effect diminishing the apparent difference between placebo and verum treatment.
This retrospective analysis explores the screening phase data with respect to the risk of failure to demonstrate a specific effect of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) with randomisation at the start of the treatment.
During the screening phase, 84% (70/83) of the children responded to treatment and reached eligibility for the randomised trial after a median time of 5 months (range 1-18), with a median of 3 different medications (range 1-9). Thirteen children (16%) did not reach eligibility. Five months after treatment start, the difference in Conners Global Index (CGI) rating between responders and non-responders became highly significant (p = 0.0006). Improvement in CGI was much greater following the identification of the optimal medication than in the preceding suboptimal treatment period (p < 0.0001).
Because of the necessity of identifying an optimal medication before response to treatment can be expected, randomisation at the start of treatment in an RCT of homeopathy in ADHD children has a high risk of failure to demonstrate a specific treatment effect, if the observation time is shorter than 12 months.
采用顺势疗法治疗注意力缺陷多动障碍(ADHD)患者存在困难。瑞士针对ADHD患者开展的随机、安慰剂对照、交叉试验(瑞士ADHD试验)在随机对照阶段之前设计了一个开放标签筛查阶段。在筛查阶段,观察每个儿童对连续顺势疗法药物的反应,直至确定最佳药物。只有达到预定改善水平的儿童才参与随机交叉阶段。尽管随机阶段显示顺势疗法有显著的有益效果,但交叉导致了强烈的残留效应,缩小了安慰剂和有效治疗之间的明显差异。
本回顾性分析探讨了筛查阶段的数据,涉及在治疗开始时进行随机分组的随机对照试验(RCT)未能证明特定疗效的风险。
在筛查阶段,84%(70/83)的儿童对治疗有反应,中位时间5个月(范围1 - 18个月)后达到随机试验的合格标准,使用的药物中位数为3种(范围1 - 9种)。13名儿童(16%)未达到合格标准。治疗开始5个月后,有反应者和无反应者在康纳斯全球指数(CGI)评分上的差异变得非常显著(p = 0.0006)。确定最佳药物后CGI的改善比之前次优治疗期大得多(p < 0.0001)。
由于在预期治疗有反应之前需要确定最佳药物,如果观察时间短于12个月,在ADHD儿童顺势疗法RCT中治疗开始时进行随机分组有很高的风险无法证明特定的治疗效果。