Background Based on a pluralistic approach to health care, India offers a range of medical treatment modalities to its population. In that context, the government of India aims at providing its people with wider access to homeopathy. This article provides insight into the infrastructural support put in place by the government to meet that aim. Data and Methods A literature review was carried out of recent surveys and articles to assess the morbidity trends in India and the treatment modalities being sought by patients. Extensive attempts were made to identify and access all data sources that could contribute to understanding the situation of homeopathy in public health in India. These efforts included analysis of secondary data about government wellness centres, as also a case study of one such centre. Results In India, homeopathy is well represented in public health, being a close second among the AYUSH (Ayurveda, Yoga and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha and Homeopathy) services. Homeopathy wellness centres comprise 31% of the total for AYUSH. Seven out of 10 diseases recognised as a national health burden are in the category of most commonly reported diseases at the homeopathy wellness centres. Academic homeopathy institutes comprise 35.8% of AYUSH colleges, the total student intakes of which are 13,658 and 32,256 respectively. Homeopathy practitioners are 37% of the AYUSH total. Homeopathy units comprise 1/19th of the number of allopathy units, yet the annual patient footfall in the former is 1/5th of the latter. Conclusion Homeopathy services, wherever available, are being used fully and thus sharing the patient load in the government-run wellness centres. There is the potential for more homeopathic practitioners to contribute importantly to health care delivery in India.

Background: Successful management of periodontitis requires treatment strategy that integrates therapies addressing both pathogen and host aspects of disease etiology. To evaluate sub gingivally applied curcumin gel in treatment of chronic periodontitis based on clinical and biochemical parameters. Materials & Methods: A randomized, double blind, parallel-group trial was carried out on 30 patients suffering from chronic generalized periodontitis with probing pocket depth≥5mm on at least 4 sites who were then randomly allocated to two groups. Control group was treated with Scaling and Root Planing (SRP) alone while experimental group was treated with SRP followed by subgingival application of curcumin gel. Saliva collection was done and the clinical parameters were recorded at baseline and follow up periods. Saliva analysis for IL-1β was done by ELISA. The statistical differences for the intra-group and intergroup measurements were analyzed by using Mann Whitney test. Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient was used to examine the relationship between Interleukin - 1β and clinical parameters. Results: Study elucidated mild adjunctive benefit of curcumin gel in reduction of gingival inflammation for a limited period of time. Though improvement in other clinical parameters was also greater in subjects treated with curcumin gel, results were not statistically different from those treated with SRP alone. None of the subjects who received curcumin gel experienced any adverse effect. Conclusion: Within limitations, it can be concluded that single application of curcumin (turmeric) gel has limited added benefit over scaling and root planing in treatment of chronic periodontitis.

Objectives This study aimed to evaluate whether individualized homeopathic medicines have a greater adjunctive effect than adjunctive placebos in the treatment of moderate and severe cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods The study was a randomized, single-blind, prospective, placebo-controlled clinical trial set in the clinical context of standard care. Intervention Patients of either sex, admitted in a tertiary care hospital, suffering from moderate or severe COVID-19 and above 18 years of age were included. In total, 150 patients were recruited and then randomly divided into two groups to receive either individualized homeopathic medicines or placebos, in addition to the standard treatment of COVID-19. Outcome Measures The primary outcome was time taken to achieve RT-PCR-confirmed virus clearance for COVID-19. Secondary outcomes were changes in the Clinical Ordinal Outcomes Scale (COOS) of the World Health Organization, the patient-reported MYMOP2 scale, and several biochemical parameters. Parametric data were analyzed using unpaired t-test. Non-parametric data were analyzed using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. Categorical data were analyzed using Chi-square test. Results In total, 72 participants of the add-on homeopathy (AoH) group showed conversion of RT-PCR status to negative, in an average time of 7.53 ± 4.76 days (mean ± SD), as compared with 11.65 ± 9.54 days in the add-on placebo (AoP) group (p = 0.001). The mean COOS score decreased from 4.26 ± 0.44 to 3.64 ± 1.50 and from 4.3 ± 0.46 to 4.07 ± 1.8 in the AoH and AoP groups respectively (p = 0.130). The mortality rate for the AoH group was 9.7% compared with 17.3% in the AoP group. The MYMOP2 scores between the two groups differed significantly (p = 0.001), in favor of AoH. Inter-group differences in the pre- and post- mean values of C-reactive protein, fibrinogen, total leukocyte count, platelet count and alkaline phosphatase were each found to be statistically significant (p <0.05), favoring AoH; six other biochemical parameters showed no statistically significant differences. Conclusion The study suggests homeopathy may be an effective adjunct to standard care for treating moderate and severe COVID-19 patients. More rigorous, including double-blinded, studies should be performed to confirm or refute these initial findings.

Background & objectives: No definite treatment is known for COVID-19 till date. The objective of this study is to assess the efficacy of customized Homoeopathic medicines, when used as an add-on treatment to Standard of Care (SOC), in patients suffering from moderate to severe COVID-19 infection. Methods: This was a randomized, controlled, single-blind, parallel-group trial where 214 COVID19-positive patients were screened for moderate and severe cases of COVID-19. Adjuvant homoeopathic medicines were given in the treatment group and SOC was given to both groups. The duration of oxygen support was compared as the primary outcome. Subjects were followed for 28 days or till the end-point of mechanical ventilation/ death. Results: Of 129 subjects included, 57 and 55 were severe; and 8 and 9 were moderate cases in Homoeopathy and SOC arms, respectively. In all, 9 (15.2%) participants in Homoeopathy and 20 (32.2%) participants in SOC arms eventually expired (p<0.05). Oxygen support was required for 9.84±7.00 and 14.92±7.549 days in Homoeopathy and SOC arms, respectively (p<0.005). Subjects receiving Homoeopathy (12.9±6.days) had a shorter hospitalization stay than in SOC (14.9±7.5 days). Homoeopathy arm (10.6±5.7 days) also showed statistically significant mean conversion time of of Realtime-Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) from positive to negative than the SOC arm (12.9±5.6 days). The mean score of Clinical Outcome Ordinal Scale (COOS) was lower in the Homoeopathy arm. Laboratory markers [Interleukins (IL)-6, C-reactive protein (CRP), Neutrophils-Lymphocytes ratio (NLR)]were normalized earlier in Homoeopathy arm. Conclusion: Homoeopathy, as add-on therapy with SOC for COVID-19 management, demonstrates a reduction in mortality and morbidity, by reduced requirement of oxygen and hospitalization. Some laboratory markers are normalized at an earlier time. Hence, there is overall control over the disease. Registry: The study was registered on the http://ctri.nic.in/Clinicaltrials website under identifier number: CTRI/2020/12/029668 on 9th December 2020.

Public health information systems in LMICs have an been studied in the context of primary health care while systems in district hospitals have not attracted the required attention. This is a sad neglect, given that district hospitals in LMICs cater to a high proportion of the population in a district and also provide life-saving healthcare services. ICTs have played a significant role in improving social trust in LMICs and we explore this in context of public health in India. While getting hospital information systems to work in district settings is a non-trivial and expensive challenge, it becomes imperative to understand what benefits citizens experience with the introduction of such systems. Drawing from an empirical base of a successful 10-year implementation of a hospital information system across a network of 20+ district hospitals in the state of Himachal Pradesh, India, the authors use the conceptual perspective of institutional and interpersonal trusts to analyze the perceived benefits seen for patients, and how this has helped shape patient trust towards the technological intervention and the hospital from where they avail services.