Quasi-experimental trial shows reduced nasal symptoms in adolescents and adults using individualized homeopathic medicines, suggesting potential efficacy.
Nasal inferior turbinate hypertrophy (NITH) represents a prevalent cause of persistent nasal obstruction, second only to structural anomalies in sinonasal disorders, affecting up to 77% of patients. While medical therapies such as intranasal corticosteroids serve as first-line treatments, persistent cases may necessitate surgery with risks of complications and recurrence. Despite widespread clinical use, evidence evaluating individualized homeopathic medicines (IHMs) for NITH remains limited. This prospective, single-group, quasi-experimental study enrolled 50 participants aged 12 to 65 years with NITH (ICD-11: CA0E) at a homeopathic outpatient department in India. IHMs were prescribed in centesimal potencies according to classical principles, with adjunctive advice on vapor inhalation and dust avoidance, including minimizing exposure to house dust, avoiding carpets and heavy curtains, regular wet cleaning, and washing bedding in hot water. The primary outcome was the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE; 0–100) score; secondary outcomes were the Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22 (SNOT-22; 0–110) and Measure Yourself Medical Outcome Profile, Version 2 (MYMOP-2; 0–6). Assessments were conducted at baseline and monthly for 3 months, analyzed using repeated-measures analysis and mixed-effects models under intention-to-treat principles. Fifty participants were enrolled; 42 completed follow-up. Statistically significant changes over time were observed across all outcomes (all p < 0.001). Mean NOSE scores changed from 80.8 ± 24.9 (standard deviation [SD]) at baseline to 11.7 ± 12.0 at 3 months. SNOT-22 scores changed from 56.6 ± 22.4 to 6.4 ± 6.2, and median MYMOP-2 scores from 5.0 (interquartile range [IQR] 2.7–5.5) to 1.0 (1.0–2.7). Individualized homeopathic management under a structured protocol was associated with reductions in patient-reported sinonasal symptoms over 3 months. The single-group design and absence of objective measures preclude causal inference. Randomized controlled trials are required to determine specific efficacy. CTRI/2024/03/064366.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Khatun et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: