Homeopathy and health related Quality of Life: a patient satisfaction survey in six European countries and Brazil

Background: Many patients throughout the world consult homeopathic medical doctors. Using a similar methodology as in a first survey published in 2002 a second survey was done including 919 adults receiving homeopathic treatment in six European countries and Brazil aimed to look at who are they, their reasons for consultations and expectations and satisfaction with homeopathy prescribed by a homeopathic doctor after a follow-up time of six months.

Method: An initial questionnaire included demographic information and questions for assessing health-related Quality of Life (QoL). A follow-up questionnaire collected data on changes in QoL.

Results: 77% patients had initially used conventional treatments and 23% other non-conventional treatments. Satisfaction of patients with the medical homeopathic consultation is high. The difference between the final QoL scores after six months and the baseline are positive. Reported differences between baseline and final index range from 3.87 to 10.41 depending on diagnosis. Taking 7% as a reference value for 'minimal clinically significant difference', this is reached for 3 of 8 conditions. Changes in complaint limitations visual scales are positive. Conclusions on clinical impact must be cautious. 6% of the patients experienced side-effects which they attributed to homeopathic treatment. 7.8% of the patients reported significant aggravation at the beginning of the homeopathic treatment and 26.2% slight aggravation of symptoms.

Conclusions: The satisfaction of patients using a medical homeopathic approach is linked to the perceived competence of the doctor homeopath, the perceived improvement of the main complaints limitations and the time dedicated to them by the doctor.

Keywords

Homeopathy - Quality of Life evaluation - Prospective survey

• References

• 1 Keckley P.H., Coughlin S. Survey of health care consumers. Global Report Deloitte Center for Health Solutions; 2011. [e-mail].
• 2 Guadagnoli E., Mc Nail B.J. Outcomes research : hope for the future or latest rage. Inquiry 1994; 31: 14-24.
• 3 Rapier C.M. An introduction to outcomes research. Surrey: Brookwood Medical Publications; 1996.
• 4 Anelli M., Scheepers L., Sermeus G., Van Wassenhoven M. Homeopathy and health related Quality of Life: A survey in six European countries. Homeopathy 2002; 91: 18-21.
• 5 Mc Horney C., Ware J.E., Roger W., Raczek A., Lu J.F.R. The validity and relative precision of MOS short- and long-form health status and Dartmouth COOP charts. Results from the medical outcomes study. Med Care 1992; 30: 253-265.
• 6 Juniper E.F., Guyatt G.H., Willan A., Griffith L.E. Determining a minimal important change in a disease-specific Quality of Life questionnaire. J Clin Epidemiol 47 (01) 1994; 81-87.
• 7 Jaeschke R., Singer J., Guyatt G.H. Measurement of health status, ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials 1989; 10: 407-415.
• 8 Tubach F., Ravaud P., Baron G. et al. Evaluation of clinically relevant changes in patient reported outcomes in knee and hip osteoarthritis: the minimal clinically important improvement. Ann Rheum Dis 2005; 64: 29-33.
• 9 Hill P.B., Hoare J., Lau-Gillard P., Rybnicek J., Mathie R.T. Pilot study of the effect of individualised homeopathy on the pruritus associated with atopic dermatitis in dogs. Veterinary Rec 2009; March 21: 364-370.