Treatment for hyperactive children: homeopathy and methylphenidate compared in a family setting

H Frei , A Thurneysen
{"title":"Treatment for hyperactive children: homeopathy and methylphenidate compared in a family setting","authors":"H Frei ,&nbsp;A Thurneysen","doi":"10.1054/homp.1999.0506","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The sharp increase of the prescription of methylphenidate (MPD) in hyperactive children in recent years is a matter of increasing uneasiness among professionals, parents and politicians. There is little awareness of treatment alternatives. The purpose of this prospective trial was to assess the efficacy of homeopathy in hyperactive patients and to compare it MPD. The study was performed in a paediatric practice with conventional and homeopathic backgrounds. Children aged 3–17<!--> <!-->y, conforming to the DSM-IV criteria for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) with a Conners Global Index (CGI) of 14 or higher were eligible for the study. All of them received an individual homeopathic treatment. When clinical improvement reached 50%, the parents were asked to reevaluate the symptoms. Those who did not improve sufficiently on homeopathy were changed to MPD, and again evaluated after 3 months. One hundred and fifteen children (92 boys, 23 girls) with a mean age of 8.3<!--> <!-->y at diagnosis were included in the study. Prior to treatment the mean CGI was 20.63 (14–30), the mean index of the homeopathy group 20.52 and of the MPD-group 20.94. After an average treatment time of 3.5 months 86 children (75%) had responded to homeopathy, reaching a clinical improvement rating of 73% and an amelioration of the CGI of 55%. Twenty-five children (22%) needed MPD; the average duration of homeopathic (pre-) treatment in this group was 22 months. Clinical improvement under MPD reached 65%, the lowering of the CGI 48%. Three children did not respond to homeopathy nor to MPD, and one left the study. In cases where treatment of a hyperactive child is not urgent, homeopathy is a valuable alternative to MPD. The reported results of homeopathic treatment appear to be similar to the effects of MPD. Only children who did not reach the high level of sensory integration for school had to be changed to MPD. In preschoolers, homeopathy appears a particularly useful treatment for ADHD.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100201,"journal":{"name":"British Homoeopathic Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2001-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1054/homp.1999.0506","citationCount":"68","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Homoeopathic Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1475491699905064","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 68

Abstract

The sharp increase of the prescription of methylphenidate (MPD) in hyperactive children in recent years is a matter of increasing uneasiness among professionals, parents and politicians. There is little awareness of treatment alternatives. The purpose of this prospective trial was to assess the efficacy of homeopathy in hyperactive patients and to compare it MPD. The study was performed in a paediatric practice with conventional and homeopathic backgrounds. Children aged 3–17 y, conforming to the DSM-IV criteria for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) with a Conners Global Index (CGI) of 14 or higher were eligible for the study. All of them received an individual homeopathic treatment. When clinical improvement reached 50%, the parents were asked to reevaluate the symptoms. Those who did not improve sufficiently on homeopathy were changed to MPD, and again evaluated after 3 months. One hundred and fifteen children (92 boys, 23 girls) with a mean age of 8.3 y at diagnosis were included in the study. Prior to treatment the mean CGI was 20.63 (14–30), the mean index of the homeopathy group 20.52 and of the MPD-group 20.94. After an average treatment time of 3.5 months 86 children (75%) had responded to homeopathy, reaching a clinical improvement rating of 73% and an amelioration of the CGI of 55%. Twenty-five children (22%) needed MPD; the average duration of homeopathic (pre-) treatment in this group was 22 months. Clinical improvement under MPD reached 65%, the lowering of the CGI 48%. Three children did not respond to homeopathy nor to MPD, and one left the study. In cases where treatment of a hyperactive child is not urgent, homeopathy is a valuable alternative to MPD. The reported results of homeopathic treatment appear to be similar to the effects of MPD. Only children who did not reach the high level of sensory integration for school had to be changed to MPD. In preschoolers, homeopathy appears a particularly useful treatment for ADHD.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
多动症儿童的治疗:顺势疗法和哌甲酯在家庭环境中的比较
近年来,多动症儿童服用哌醋甲酯(MPD)的人数急剧增加,这引起了专业人士、家长和政界人士越来越多的不安。人们对其他治疗方法的认识很少。这项前瞻性试验的目的是评估顺势疗法对多动症患者的疗效,并将其与MPD进行比较。该研究在具有传统和顺势疗法背景的儿科实践中进行。符合DSM-IV注意缺陷多动障碍(ADHD)标准且康纳斯全球指数(CGI)为14或更高的3-17岁儿童符合本研究的资格。他们都接受了单独的顺势疗法治疗。当临床改善达到50%时,要求家长重新评估症状。顺势疗法没有充分改善的患者改为MPD,并在3个月后再次评估。115名儿童(92名男孩,23名女孩)被纳入研究,诊断时平均年龄为8.3岁。治疗前平均CGI指数为20.63(14-30),顺势疗法组平均指数为20.52,mpd组平均指数为20.94。平均治疗3.5个月后,86名儿童(75%)对顺势疗法有反应,达到73%的临床改善率和55%的CGI改善率。25名儿童(22%)需要MPD;顺势疗法(前)治疗的平均持续时间为22个月。MPD组临床改善达65%,CGI降低48%。三个孩子对顺势疗法和MPD都没有反应,一个离开了研究。在治疗多动症儿童不紧急的情况下,顺势疗法是MPD的一个有价值的替代方法。报道的顺势疗法治疗的结果似乎与MPD的效果相似。只有在学校没有达到高水平感觉统合的孩子才会被改为MPD。在学龄前儿童中,顺势疗法似乎是一种特别有效的治疗多动症的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Book Reviews Research for whom? Treatment for hyperactive children: homeopathy and methylphenidate compared in a family setting Our new title: Homeopathy Homeopathy in acute otitis media in children: treatment effect or spontaneous resolution?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1