1. TSh
    : 124
    : 12.04.2019, 19:19
  2. 07
    : 1
    : 14.11.2005, 00:25
  3. : 1
    : 21.06.2004, 08:53
  4. : 1
    : 09.06.2004, 15:18
  5. : 2
    : 06.05.2004, 00:28


  1. TSh

    , :

    - 55,5 ( 45-55) .

    - 52,4 ( 89) .

    - 47,3 ( 45-55) .

    , : ? , , ?

  2. Dr. Vad
    , !

    , : , , . - VII. , - .

    , .


    Schmerz. 1996 Jun 17;10(3):156-62.

    [Homeopathy in headaches. A review]

    Walach H, Haag G.

    Universitat Freiburg, Rehabilitationspsychologie, D-79 085 Freiburg.

    Homeopathy as an alternative to conventional therapy is becoming increasingly popular. Although interest is rising, little is known about the real effectiveness of homeopathic therapy in headaches. Three studies addressing this question are discussed: an Italian migraine study, the London migraine study and our own, the Munich headache trial. While the first one reported very high effects, the best ones known in the literature, the results of the other two trials do not endorse this first finding. The London trial did not show any effect other than placebo, although a different time trend was reported. The Munich study failed to show any difference between homeopathy and placebo whatsoever. The merits and shortcomings of these studies are discussed. At present, we do not have any evidence that homeopathic therapy has any effect other than a placebo effect. However, this can be very impressive sometimes. We do not know which variables are correlated with placebo effectiveness, and we do not have any data on real-type homeopathy outside a trial setting, as there are no data available.

    Br Homeopath J. 2000 Jan;89(1):4-7.

    Homeopathic treatment of migraine: a double blind, placebo controlled trial of 68 patients

    Straumsheim P, Borchgrevink C, Mowinckel P, Kierulf H, Hafslund O.

    Arena Medisinske Senter, Sognsveien, Oslo, Norway.

    To evaluate the efficacy of homeopathy in preventing migraine attacks and accompanying symptoms, a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial was conducted. There was a one-month registration period without treatment, followed by four months individualised homeopathic treatment or identical placebo. Patients were stratified for common or classical migraine. Seventy-three patients were randomised, 68 completed the trial. Baseline values were similar in the two groups. Both the homeopathy and placebo groups had reduction in attack frequency, pain intensity and drug consumption, with a statistically non-significant difference favouring homeopathy. Migraine diaries showed no difference between groups. The neurologists' trial evaluation showed a statistically significant reduction in attack frequency in the homeopathy group (P= 0.04) and non-statistically significant trends in favour of homeopathy for pain intensity and overall evaluation. Further research, with improved trial design, on the possible role of homeopathy in migraine prophylaxis is justified.

    J Pain Symptom Manage. 1999 Nov;18(5):353-7.

    Homeopathic prophylaxis of headaches and migraine? A systematic review.

    Ernst E.

    Department of Complementary Medicine, School of Postgraduate Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Exeter, United Kingdom.

    Homeopathy is often advocated as a prophylaxis of migraine and headaches. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the clinical trials, testing the efficacy of homeopathy for these indications. Independent computerized literature searches were carried out in 4 databases. Only randomized, placebo-controlled trials were included. Four such studies were found. Their methodological quality was variable but, on average, satisfactory. One study suggested that homeopathic remedies were effective. The other, methodologically stronger trials did not support this notion. It is concluded that the trial data available to date do not suggest that homeopathy is effective in the prophylaxis of migraine or headache beyond a placebo effect.

    : ().

  3. Dr. Vad

    . :

    Rev Neurol (Paris). 2000;156 Suppl 4:4S79-86.

    [Prophylactic treatments of migraine]

    Massiou H.

    Hopital Lariboisiere, Service de Neurologie, Paris.

    The choice of the drug to start with depends on several considerations. The first step is to make sure that there are no contra indications, and no possible interaction with the abortive medications. Then, possible side effects will be taken into account, for example, weight gain is a problem for most young women and patients who practice sports may not tolerate betablockers. Associated pathologies have to be checked. For example, a hypertensive migraine sufferers may benefit from betablockers; in a patient who suffers both from migraine and tension type headaches or from depression, amitriptyline is the first choice drug. The type of migraine should also be considered;

    **for instance, in frequent attacks with aura, aspirin is recommended and betablockers avoided.**

    In most cases, prophylaxis should be given as monotherapy, and it is often necessary to try successively several drugs before finding the most appropriate one. Doses should be increased gradually, in order to reach the recommended daily dose, only if tolerance permits. The treatment efficacy has to be assessed after 2 or 3 months, during which the patient must keep a headache diary. If the drug is judged ineffective, an overuse of symptomatic medications should be checked, as well as a poor compliance, either of which may be responsible. In case of a successful treatment, it should be continued for 6 or 12 months, and then, one should try to taper off the dose in order to stop the treatment or at least to find the minimum active dose.

    - .

    , , , . , , "" "" .

  4. TSh
    , . VII? , .. ( ) . , , , , .. , . : , , , .. , ? , ? .

  5. #125

9 9 ... 3456789

, , , ,