Department of Community Medicine, D.N.De Homoeopathic Medical College and Hospital, Govt. of West Bengal, Tangra, Kolkata, West Bengal, India.
Department of Organon of Medicine and Homoeopathic Philosophy, D.N.De Homoeopathic Medical College and Hospital, Govt. of West Bengal, Tangra, Kolkata, West Bengal, India.
Homeopathy. 2022 May;111(2):97-104. doi: 10.1055/s-0041-1734026. Epub 2021 Oct 29.
There is some evidence that homeopathic treatment has been used successfully in previous epidemics, and currently some countries are testing homeoprophylaxis for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. There is a strong tradition of homeopathic treatment in India: therefore, we decided to compare three different homeopathic medicines against placebo in prevention of COVID-19 infections.
In this double-blind, cluster-randomized, placebo-controlled, four parallel arms, community-based, clinical trial, a 20,000-person sample of the population residing in Ward Number 57 of the Tangra area, Kolkata, was randomized in a 1:1:1:1 ratio of clusters to receive one of three homeopathic medicines ( 30cH, 30cH, 30cH) or identical-looking placebo, for 3 (children) or 6 (adults) days. All the participants, who were aged 5 to 75 years, received ascorbic acid (vitamin C) tablets of 500 mg, once per day for 6 days. In addition, instructions on healthy diet and general hygienic measures, including hand washing, social distancing and proper use of mask and gloves, were given to all the participants.
No new confirmed COVID-19 cases were diagnosed in the target population during the follow-up timeframe of 1 month-December 20, 2020 to January 19, 2021-thus making the trial inconclusive. The group had the least exposure to COVID-19 compared with the other groups. In comparison with placebo, the occurrence of unconfirmed COVID-19 cases was significantly less in the group (week 1: odds ratio [OR], 0.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.06 to 0.16; week 2: OR, 0.004; 95% CI, 0.0002 to 0.06; week 3: OR, 0.007; 95% CI, 0.0004 to 0.11; week 4: OR, 0.009; 95% CI, 0.0006 to 0.14), but not in the or groups.
Overall, the trial was inconclusive. The possible effect exerted by necessitates further investigation.
CTRI/2020/11/029265.
有证据表明顺势疗法治疗在以前的流行病中已被成功应用，目前一些国家正在针对 2019 年冠状病毒病（COVID-19）大流行测试顺势疗法预防。印度有顺势疗法治疗的悠久传统：因此，我们决定比较三种不同的顺势疗法制剂与安慰剂在预防 COVID-19 感染方面的效果。
在这项双盲、整群随机、安慰剂对照、四组平行臂、以社区为基础的临床试验中，加尔各答 Tangra 区第 57 街区的 20000 名居民被随机分为 1:1:1:1 的比例接受三种顺势疗法制剂之一（30cH、30cH、30cH）或相同外观的安慰剂，连续 3（儿童）或 6（成人）天。所有年龄在 5 至 75 岁之间的参与者均接受 500 毫克维生素 C 片（抗坏血酸），每天一次，持续 6 天。此外，所有参与者都接受了关于健康饮食和一般卫生措施的指导，包括洗手、保持社交距离以及正确使用口罩和手套。
在 2020 年 12 月 20 日至 2021 年 1 月 19 日的 1 个月随访期间，目标人群中未诊断出新的确诊 COVID-19 病例，因此试验结果不确定。与其他组相比，组的 COVID-19 暴露最少。与安慰剂相比，组发生未确诊 COVID-19 病例的情况明显减少（第 1 周：比值比[OR]，0.1；95%置信区间[CI]，0.06 至 0.16；第 2 周：OR，0.004；95%CI，0.0002 至 0.06；第 3 周：OR，0.007；95%CI，0.0004 至 0.11；第 4 周：OR，0.009；95%CI，0.0006 至 0.14），但在 组或 组中则不然。
总体而言，试验结果不确定。需要进一步调查 制剂可能产生的影响。
CTRI/2020/11/029265。
