Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Curr Allergy Asthma Rep ; 13(2): 229-35, 2013 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23354530

RESUMO

The use of saline nasal irrigation (SNI) in the treatment of nasal and sinus disorders has its roots in the yoga tradition and homeopathic medicine. In recent years, SNI has been increasingly observed as concomitant therapy for acute (ARS) and chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). Various devices are employed, such as nasal douches, neti pots or sprays. The saline solutions used vary in composition and concentration. This article gives a current overview of literature on the clinical efficacy of SNI in the treatment of ARS and CRS. It then answers frequent questions that arise in daily clinical routine (nasal spray vs. nasal irrigation, saline solution composition and concentration, possible risks for patients). SNI has been an established option in CRS treatment for many years. All large medical associations and the authors of systematic reviews consistently conclude that SNI is a useful addition for treating CRS symptoms. SNI use in ARS therapy, however, is controversial. The results of systematic reviews and medical associations' recommendations show the existing but limited efficacy of SNI in ARS. For clinical practice, nasal douches are recommended-whatever the form of rhinosinusitis-along with isotonic and hypertonic saline solutions in CRS (in ARS to a limited extent). To prevent infections, it is essential to clean the nasal douche thoroughly and use the proper salt concentration (2-3.5 %). Conclusive proof of the efficacy of SNI in the treatment of ARS is still pending. In CRS, SNI is one of the cornerstones of treatment.


Assuntos
Lavagem Nasal , Rinite/terapia , Sinusite/terapia , Cloreto de Sódio/uso terapêutico , Doença Aguda , Doença Crônica , Humanos , Líquido da Lavagem Nasal , Rinite/fisiopatologia , Sinusite/fisiopatologia
2.
Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol ; 107(2): 171-8, 2011 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21802026

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy and safety of ICX72 or Sinus Buster, a proprietary homeopathic preparation of Capsicum annum and Eucalyptol, versus placebo administered continuously over 2 weeks in subjects with a significant component of nonallergic rhinitis (NAR). METHODS: Forty-two consented subjects meeting inclusion/exclusion criteria were randomized to ICX72 (n = 20) or control (n = 22) administered twice daily over 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was change in total nasal symptom scores (TNSS) from baseline to end of study. Secondary endpoints included changes in individual symptom scores (ISS) over 2 weeks and average time to first relief. Mean TNSS and ISS were recorded after single dosing at different intervals over 60 minutes. Rhinitis quality-of-life, rescue medication, and safety endpoints were analyzed. RESULTS: ICX72 versus placebo subjects exhibited significant differences in changes from baseline to end of study for TNSS and each ISS (P < .01), had an average time to first relief of 52.6 seconds (P < .01), and improvement in nasal congestion, sinus pain, sinus pressure, and headache at 5, 10, 15, and 30 minutes, persisting at 60 minutes for nasal congestion and sinus pain (P < .05). No difference between groups in adverse events or rescue medication was observed. ICX72 versus placebo subjects experienced no rebound congestion or impaired olfaction at the end of the study. CONCLUSION: This is the first controlled trial demonstrating intranasal capsaicin, when used continuously over 2 weeks, rapidly and safely improves symptoms in rhinitis subjects with a significant NAR component.


Assuntos
Capsaicina/administração & dosagem , Rinite/tratamento farmacológico , Inquéritos e Questionários , Adolescente , Adulto , Capsaicina/efeitos adversos , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Cefaleia , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Obstrução Nasal , Sprays Nasais , Placebos/administração & dosagem , Placebos/efeitos adversos , Qualidade de Vida , Rinite/fisiopatologia
3.
Homeopathy ; 91(3): 145-9, 2002 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-12322867

RESUMO

Four double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trials of asthma or rhinitis treated with homeopathic immunotherapy (HIT) at a 30C potency have been published. The most recent study, involving house dust mite allergic asthmatics, failed to confirm a therapeutic improvement at the end of the study, but did provide preliminary evidence for an oscillation in outcome (both physiological and subjective) in with verum treatment to placebo. In this paper we show how such an oscillation is consistent with a complexity theory interpretation of how the body functions as a whole, and speculate on why different studies have produced different results. If the complexity theory interpretation is correct, then this will have a significant impact on the design of clinical trials in homeopathy and, possibly, other complementary medical interventions.


Assuntos
Asma/terapia , Homeopatia/métodos , Fitoterapia , Rinite/terapia , Asma/fisiopatologia , Método Duplo-Cego , Humanos , Extratos Vegetais/uso terapêutico , Viés de Publicação , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto/normas , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Projetos de Pesquisa , Rinite/fisiopatologia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA