Evaluating Clinical Evidence in Daily Medical Practice. Systematic Real-life Evaluations of Patients’ Long-Term Outcome can Optimise the Therapeutic Results for Patients and Trigger Effective Research

Background: In 1996 we began comparing the outcome of our patients treated with different integrative methods like herbal medicine, acupuncture, hypnotherapy and homeopathy, in-line with the criteria of Evidence-Based-Practice “EBP.” EBP represents the integration of best research-evidence, clinical expertise and the patient´s experience and values, with the aim of establishing best practices for patient care.

Methodology: The following patient outcome data were systematically recorded and assessed:

- objective parameters like RR, CT, NMR, X-ray, laboratory tests: EBP1.

- our professional medical assessment of the patient’s clinical and psychologic state: EBP2.

- the patient’s own reporting on their physical, psychological, and social state of wellbeing: EBP3/PROM (Patient Reported Outcome Measures). Second, we compared different homeopathic methodologies that we had thoroughly trained and practiced for at least 5 years. Previous results showed significant differences between different integrative methods and within different homeopathic methodologies. This led to a meta-evaluation of homeopathically treated cases with outstanding outcomes.

Results: Outstanding patient outcomes only marginally depended on the severity of the underlying diagnosis. In contrast, crucial predictors for excellent outcomes were found to be:

1. The exactness of the homeopathic prescription, determined by the availability of an excellent proving

2. The depth and exactness of the case-taking with respect to leading symptoms, the in-depth-exploration of mental and general symptoms, and their shared peculiar symptoms.

In these cases, we found a striking correlation between the scientifically objective characteristics of the drug source and the patient's own perception of their symptoms.

Conclusion: Homeopathic methodology can influence the long-term outcome in severe diseases. Further research on methodologies based on EBP1–3 criteria is needed, regarding the following questions:

- Do different types of prescribers exist, with access to differing methods/ patients/ diseases?

- Which long-term results do homeopathic prescription-methodologies yield?

- Do certain methodologies, if well practised, produce better results than others?

Keywords: Case-taking, methodologies, outcome, EBP1–3, research

Publication History

Article published online:
30 January 2024