OBJECTIVES: To assess the use, effectiveness and safety of a homoeopathic preparation (Traumeel) compared with conventional therapies in the treatment of trauma and injuries. METHODS: Multi-centre, prospective, comparative observational cohort study of patients with various musculoskeletal injuries. German physicians who were using homoeopathy in addition to conventional medicine included patients. Patients treated with Traumeel were compared with patients managed conventionally. The primary outcome measure was the rate of resolution of the principal symptoms (i.e. pain and inflammatory symptoms) at the end of therapy. RESULTS: Sixty-nine Traumeel treated and 64 conventionally treated patients fitted the selection criteria. The most common diagnoses were acute injuries (sprains, strains, contusions, etc.) of the ankles, knees and hands. There were no significant differences between demographic and anamnestic baseline characteristics of both groups. Complete resolution of the principal symptom at the end of therapy occurred in 41 (59.4%) patients in the homoeopathy group versus 37 (57.8%) patients in the conventional group. No adverse events were reported in the Traumeel group compared to six adverse events (6.3%) in the conventional group. Physician-assessed tolerability was significantly better in the Traumeel group (P=0.001). CONCLUSION: Traumeel is as effective as conventional medicines in the management of mild to moderate injuries in this population. Traumeel was safe in use and judged by physicians to be better tolerated than conventional medicines. This study contributes to the case for a broad clinical effectiveness of Traumeel in the treatment of acute injuries and trauma.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the use, effectiveness and safety of a homoeopathic preparation (Traumeel) compared with conventional therapies in the treatment of trauma and injuries. METHODS: Multi-centre, prospective, comparative observational cohort study of patients with various musculoskeletal injuries. German physicians who were using homoeopathy in addition to conventional medicine included patients. Patients treated with Traumeel were compared with patients managed conventionally. The primary outcome measure was the rate of resolution of the principal symptoms (i.e. pain and inflammatory symptoms) at the end of therapy. RESULTS: Sixty-nine Traumeel treated and 64 conventionally treated patients fitted the selection criteria. The most common diagnoses were acute injuries (sprains, strains, contusions, etc.) of the ankles, knees and hands. There were no significant differences between demographic and anamnestic baseline characteristics of both groups. Complete resolution of the principal symptom at the end of therapy occurred in 41 (59.4%) patients in the homoeopathy group versus 37 (57.8%) patients in the conventional group. No adverse events were reported in the Traumeel group compared to six adverse events (6.3%) in the conventional group. Physician-assessed tolerability was significantly better in the Traumeel group (P=0.001). CONCLUSION: Traumeel is as effective as conventional medicines in the management of mild to moderate injuries in this population. Traumeel was safe in use and judged by physicians to be better tolerated than conventional medicines. This study contributes to the case for a broad clinical effectiveness of Traumeel in the treatment of acute injuries and trauma.
Authors: Patrick Belikan; Lisa Nauth; Lars-Christopher Färber; Frédéric Abel; Eva Langendorf; Philipp Drees; Pol Maria Rommens; Ulrike Ritz; Stefan G Mattyasovszky Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2020-03-19 Impact factor: 5.923