Abstract:
Objectives: A pharmacoeconomic study to compare, in terms of: medical effectiveness,
quality of life and costs two treatment strategies (‘homeopathic strategy’ vs ‘antibiotic
strategy’) used in routine medical practice by allopathic and homeopathic GPs in the
treatment of recurrent acute rhinopharyngitis in 18-month to 4-year-old children.
Methods: Statistical analysis of data obtained from a population of 499 patients
included in a previous 6-month prospective, pragmatic study. The patients were regrouped according to type of drug prescribed. Medical effectiveness was assessed in
terms of (i) episodes of acute rhinopharyngitis, (ii) complications, (iii) adverse effects.
Quality of life was assessed using the Par-Ent-Qolr scale. Direct medical costs (medical
consultations, drug prescriptions, prescriptions for further tests) and indirect medical
costs (sick-leave) were evaluated from three viewpoints (society, patient, Social
Security) using public prices and French Social Security tariffs.
Results: The ‘homeopathic strategy’ yielded significantly better results than the
‘antibiotic strategy’ in terms of medical effectiveness (number of episodes of
rhinopharyngitis: 2.71 vs 3.97, Po0:001; number of complications: 1.25 vs 1.95,
Po0:001), and quality of life (global score: 21.38 vs 30.43, Po0:001), with lower direct
medical costs covered by Social Security (88h vs 99h; Po0:05) and significantly less
sick-leave (9.5% of parents vs 31.6% of parents, Po0:001).
Conclusions: Homeopathy may be a cost-effective alternative to antibiotics in the
treatment of recurrent infantile rhinopharyngitis.