Background/Objective Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a new disease; its clinical profile and natural history are evolving. Each well-recorded case in homeopathic practice is important for deciding the future course of action. This study aims at identifying clinically useful homeopathic remedies and their prescribing symptoms using the prognostic factor research model. Methods This was an open-label, multi-centric, observational study performed from April 2020 to July 2020 at various public health care clinics. The data were collected prospectively from clinical practice at integrated COVID-19 care facilities in India. Good-quality cases were selected using a specific set of criteria. These cases were analyzed for elucidating prognostic factors by calculating the likelihood ratio (LR) of each frequently occurring symptom. The symptoms with high LR values (>1) were considered as prescribing indications of the specific remedy. Results Out of 327 COVID-19 cases reported, 211 met the selection criteria for analysis. The most common complaints were fatigue, sore throat, dry cough, myalgia, fever, dry mouth and throat, increased thirst, headache, decreased appetite, anxiety, and altered taste. Twenty-seven remedies were prescribed and four of them—Arsenicum album, Bryonia alba, Gelsemium sempervirens, and Pulsatilla nigricans—were the most frequently used. A high LR was obtained for certain symptoms, which enabled differentiation between the remedies for a given patient. Conclusion Homeopathic medicines were associated with improvement in symptoms of COVID-19 cases. Characteristic symptoms of four frequently indicated remedies have been identified using prognostic factor research, findings that can contribute to accurate homeopathic prescribing during future controlled research in COVID-19.
Objectives and hypothesisTo examine the influence of gender of the baby on exclusive breastfeeding and incidence of postnatal depression (PND). We hypothesise that in a society with a male gender bias there may be more PND and less exclusive breastfeeding of the girl child.DesignProspective study.SettingThe study was conducted in an urban, tertiary hospital in Delhi.ParticipantsMothers delivering normally with their babies roomed-in.1537 eligible women participated in the study.Primary and secondary outcome measuresExclusive breastfeeding within the first 48 h of life and score on the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) were recorded.Results3466 babies were born in the hospital. There were 792 girls for every 1000 boys. Among primiparous women, the sex ratio was 901 girls per 1000 boys. For second babies, the sex ratio was 737:1000. If the first child was a girl the birth ratio fell to 632. 1026 mothers were exclusively breastfeeding. Exclusive breastfeeding of boys was significantly higher (70.8% vs 61.5%, p<0.001). The EPDS score was significantly higher with the birth of girls (EPDS 6.0±3.39 vs 5.4±2.87, p<0.01). Women with an EPDS score >11 were less likely to exclusively breastfeed (p<0.01).ConclusionsThe results point to a pro-male gender bias evidenced by a low sex ratio at birth, higher EPDS score in mothers of girls and less breastfeeding of female children.
Renal biopsy plays an indispensable role in the diagnosis and management of patients with lupus nephritis (LN). A number of studies have evaluated the role of a repeat biopsy in case of disease relapse or treatment unresponsiveness. We studied 40 patients with LN with renal biopsies performed at baseline and after six months of therapy. The baseline and protocol biopsies were compared with respect to histological class transformation, crescents, tubular atrophy, interstitial fibrosis and glomerulosclerosis. We also compared serum creatinine, hemoglobin, systemic lupus erythematosus disease activity index (SLEDAI) scores, 24-h urine protein excretion and C3levels as well as activity index (AI) and chronicity index (CI) at baseline and at six months. Comparison of means was made by paired t test, McNemar test and marginal homogeneity test (multinomial data). Histological class transformation was seen in 10 patients (25%). Intra-class progression to greater chronicity was seen in 10 other patients (25%).There was an increase in glomerulosclerosis, tubular atrophy, interstitial fibrosis and a reduction in cellularity, crescent formation and wire loop lesions in the protocol biopsy. A decline in AI (6.05 vs. 2.50, P <0.001) and SLEDAI scores (8.1 vs. 3.7, P <0.001) and an increase in CI (0.68 vs. 2.52, P <0.001) was observed at the time of protocol biopsy. Our study shows a trend toward greater chronicity in protocol biopsies in LN.
Background/Objective The clinical profile and course of COVID-19 evolved perilously in a second wave, leading to the use of various treatment modalities that included homeopathy. This prognostic factor research (PFR) study aimed to identify clinically useful homeopathic medicines in this second wave. Methods This was a retrospective, multi-centred observational study performed from March 2021 to May 2021 on confirmed COVID-19 cases who were either in home isolation or at COVID Care Centres in Delhi, India. The data were collected from integrated COVID Care Centres where homeopathic medicines were prescribed along with conventional treatment. Only those cases that met a set of selection criteria were considered for analysis. The likelihood ratio (LR) was calculated for the frequently occurring symptoms of the prescribed medicines. An LR of 1.3 or greater was considered meaningful. Results Out of 769 confirmed COVID-19 cases reported, 514 cases were selected for analysis, including 467 in home isolation. The most common complaints were cough, fever, myalgia, sore throat, loss of taste and/or smell, and anxiety. Most cases improved and there was no adverse reaction. Certain new symptoms, e.g., headache, dryness of mouth and conjunctivitis, were also seen. Thirty-nine medicines were prescribed, the most frequent being Bryonia alba followed by Arsenicum album, Pulsatilla nigricans, Belladonna, Gelsemium sempervirens, Hepar sulphuris, Phosphorus, Rhus toxicodendron and Mercurius solubilis. By calculating LR, the prescribing indications of these nine medicines were ascertained. Conclusion Add-on use of homeopathic medicines has shown encouraging results in the second wave of COVID-19 in integrated care facilities. Further COVID-related research is required to be undertaken on the most commonly prescribed medicines.
BackgroundThis is a prospective, comparative, pilot and follow-up (2-year postoperatively) study in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery where the long saphenous vein was harvested either by the endoscopic vein harvest (EVH) technique or open vein harvest (OVH) technique. Quality of life (QOL) and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) were assessed.MethodsAlive patients who were initially part of a pilot study when EVH was introduced in our institution were included (n=48 EVH, n=49 OVH). Patients were sent a QOL questionnaire (SF12v2; 12-item medical outcomes study short form health survey version 2.0), and their cardiologist and general practitioner were contacted to assess MACCE.ResultsMedian follow-up was 32 and 33 months, respectively. Three patients died (2 EVH, 1 OVH). Of the remaining 97 patients who were sent a questionnaire, 76% patients returned the form. More patients from the EVH group returned the QOL questionnaire (82% vs 71%). Time taken to return to normal daily activities was much shorter in EVH (median 6 (2–30) weeks) compared with OVH (median 9 (2–50) weeks) (P<0.05). QOL questionnaire revealed significant difference in physical score at follow-up: 45.3 (10.2) for EVH group and 40.7 (11.0) for OVH group (P<0.05). There was no difference in mental scores (46.9 (10.5) vs 49.2 (9.1), P=0.4). There were no significant differences in MACCEs including death between the two groups (12.2% vs 13.9%, P=0.5).ConclusionEVH patients returned to normal daily activities faster than OVH patients and experienced better physical QOL even after 2 years postoperatively with no increase in MACCE during follow-up.
Background/Objective Most of the symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are covered by large repertory rubrics and hence many remedies have been proposed as “genus epidemicus”. The aim of this study was to combine the information from various data collections to prepare a COVID-19 Bayesian mini-repertory/an algorithm-based application (app) and test it. Methods In July 2021, 1,161 COVID-19 cases from 100 practitioners globally were combined. These data were used to calculate “condition-confined” likelihood ratios (LRs) for 59 symptoms of COVID-19. Out of these, 35 symptoms of the 11 medicines that had at least 20 cases each were considered. The information was entered in a spreadsheet (algorithm) to calculate combined LRs of specific combinations of symptoms. The algorithm contained the medicines Arsenicum album, Belladonna, Bryonia alba, Camphora, Gelsemium sempervirens, Hepar sulphuris, Mercurius solubilis, Nux vomica, Phosphorus, Pulsatilla and Rhus toxicodendron. To test concordance, the doctors were then invited to re-enter the symptoms of their cases into this algorithm. Results The algorithm was re-tested on 358 cases, and concordance was seen in 288 cases. On analysis of the data, bias was noticed in the Merc group, which was therefore excluded from the algorithm. The remaining 10 medicines, representing 81.8% of all cases, were included in the preparation of the next version of the homeopathic mini-repertory and app. Conclusion The Bayesian mini-repertory and app is based on qualitative clinical experiences of various doctors in COVID-19 and gives indications for specific medicines for common COVID-19 symptoms. It is freely available [English: https://hpra.co.uk/; Spanish: https://hpra.co.uk/es ] for further testing and utilization by the profession.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.