The role of alternative therapies in the treatment of allergic disease

Watkins, Alan

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2222.1994.tb01804.x

Cited by 18 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 99 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The placebo‐effect is an effect rather than a substance. It is mediated by undefined mechanisms which facilitate a therapeutic change, but which are usually viewed as less valid than pharmacological or other ‘active’ interventions ( Watkins 1994). Lewith (1993) suggests that the placebo response is consistent at 35·2% (± 2·2%), a figure which is generally thought to come from Beecher (1955) who quotes the average of his own 11 studies, all of which varied widely.…”

Section: Controlling For Placebo Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The use of randomized control trials in complementary therapies: exploring the issues

Richardson

2000

Journal of Advanced Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current popularity of complementary therapies presents an interesting challenge to nurses and midwives. If they are to deliver such therapies themselves, or support patients in choosing appropriate therapies they will need to consider the professional and legal issues, in particular those regarding safety. Evidence for the effectiveness for complementary therapies is also a requirement in order that their integration into nursing practice can be justified. Purchasers are currently hampered by the lack of credible evidence for effectiveness and until that evidence is provided, access to such therapies through the National Health Service (NHS) will remain limited. The form that evidence should take has led to a lively debate about possible methodological approaches. There appears to be a clash between the medical profession and those working in the field of complementary therapy research, with the medical establishment advocating randomized control trials (RCTs). This contrasts with the view held by some advocates of complementary therapies that the RCT approach is reductionist and not applicable to such approaches. The pivot of the debate on the methodological approaches for evaluating complementary therapies is the contrast of two apparently different and diverse world-views, and the assertion that methods developed in one world-view are not transferable to the other. There is also some confusion within the field of complementary therapy over the applicability of RCTs to therapies such as acupuncture, and the mistaken assumption that trials which include a control group, are also required to be double-blind. This paper is based on the need for good quality evidence of effectiveness in complementary therapy. It will set out the concerns associated with the use of RCTs within complementary therapy, together with the benefits and limitations of this approach. The paper will go on to review research options and propose some suggestions for future methodological approaches.

show abstract

Section: Controlling For Placebo Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The use of randomized control trials in complementary therapies: exploring the issues

Richardson

2000

Journal of Advanced Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These include asthma, 41,[121][122][123][124] tinnitus, 35 diabetes, 38,[125][126][127][128][129][130] chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 40 recovery after stroke (muscle re-education using biofeedback), 45,54 dermatologic conditions, 131,132 allergies, 133 irritable bowel syndrome, 134 -140 peptic ulcer, 141 pregnancy outcomes (where there is strong evidence that emotional support, ie, presence of a doula, has beneficial effects), 59,142 and human immunodeficiency virus infection. 143,144 …”

Section: Additional Clinical Areasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mind-Body Medicine: State of the Science, Implications for Practice

Astin¹,

Shapiro²,

Eisenberg³

et al. 2003

The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine

422

255

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Although emerging evidence during the past several decades suggests that psychosocial factors can directly influence both physiologic function and health outcomes, medicine had failed to move beyond the biomedical model, in part because of lack of exposure to the evidence base supporting the biopsychosocial model. The literature was reviewed to examine the efficacy of representative psychosocial-mind-body interventions, including relaxation, (cognitive) behavioral therapies, meditation, imagery, biofeedback, and hypnosis for several common clinical conditions.Methods: An electronic search was undertaken of the MEDLINE, PsycLIT, and the Cochrane Library databases and a manual search of the reference sections of relevant articles for related clinical trials and reviews of the literature. Studies examining mind-body interventions for psychological disorders were excluded. Owing to space limitations, studies examining more body-based therapies, such as yoga and tai chi chuan, were also not included. Data were extracted from relevant systematic reviews, metaanalyses, and randomized controlled trials.Results: Drawing principally from systematic reviews and meta-analyses, there is considerable evidence of efficacy for several mind-body therapies in the treatment of coronary artery disease (eg, cardiac rehabilitation), headaches, insomnia, incontinence, chronic low back pain, disease and treatmentrelated symptoms of cancer, and improving postsurgical outcomes. We found moderate evidence of efficacy for mind-body therapies in the areas of hypertension and arthritis. Additional research is required to clarify the relative efficacy of different mind-body therapies, factors (such as specific patient characteristics) that might predict more or less successful outcomes, and mechanisms of action. Research is also necessary to examine the cost offsets associated with mind-body therapies.Conclusions: There is now considerable evidence that an array of mind-body therapies can be used as effective adjuncts to conventional medical treatment for a number of common clinical conditions. Evidence emerging within the past several decades suggests that psychosocial factors from emotional states, such as depression, behavioral dispositions, such as hostility, and psychosocial stress can directly influence both physiologic function and health outcomes. [1][2][3][4] Evidence from several converging lines of research, however, also suggests that despite seemingly widespread acknowledgment of and support for the importance of the biopsychosocial model, 5-7 psycho-

show abstract

“…In this position paper, the authors examined the noninjective administration of specific immunotherapy in allergic disorders such as rhinitis and asthma, recommending to replace the 1 No efficacy (symptom/medication scores improved by <30%) Immunotherapy -Myths, Reality, Ideas, Futureterm "alternative immunotherapy" with "local immunotherapy" since the former may generate misleading associations and confusion with other, scientifically undocumented therapies used in allergic diseases, e.g., acupuncture, hypnosis, homeopathy and other methods [64]. Local immunotherapy included local nasal (LNIT), local bronchial (LBIT), oral (OIT) and sublingual (SLIT) administration of allergen extracts.…”

Section: From Subcutaneous Immunotherapy To Sublingual Immunotherapy:mentioning

confidence: 99%

Unmet Needs in Understanding Sublingual Immunotherapy to Grass Pollen

Lorenzo¹,

Leto-Barone²,

Piana³

et al. 2017

Immunotherapy - Myths, Reality, Ideas, Future

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The lack of medication for allergy symptoms at the end of the last millennium has been the promoter of the idea of treating allergies as if you were treating an infectious disease, by vaccination prophylaxis. Two forms of AIT 1) subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and 2) sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) are used in the world. Considerable interest has emerged in SLIT both scientifically and especially financially. SLIT is not a new treatment modality. First description dates back to 1900 when H. Curtis. It was relatively widely used until the late 1970's mainly in US by homeopathic therapists.A number of case series describing experience with the oral route were published during the 1920s and 1930s, but it seems to have been perceived not as efficacious nor as well tolerated as subcutaneous immunotherapy. The companies producing allergen immunotherapy have an alliance with important opinion leaders on both shores of the Atlantic.If SLIT did not work for 40 years, why should it work for respiratory allergic diseases today? This question is the mother of all questions in the field of respiratory allergic diseases. The purpose of this chapter is to provide past and current information about immunotherapy, and discuss controversies over efficacy and safety, and dosing considerations for SLIT to grass.

show abstract

The role of alternative therapies in the treatment of allergic disease

Cited by 18 publications

References 99 publications

The use of randomized control trials in complementary therapies: exploring the issues

The use of randomized control trials in complementary therapies: exploring the issues

Mind-Body Medicine: State of the Science, Implications for Practice

Unmet Needs in Understanding Sublingual Immunotherapy to Grass Pollen

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About