Article Details

Abstract

Migraine is more than an episodic headache;
recurrent pain, nausea, and intolerance to light or
sound can disrupt education, employment, and
everyday responsibilities. When symptoms persist or
standard medicines are poorly tolerated, some
patients consider homeopathic care as an additional
option. This narrative review outlines the classical
homeopathic approach to migraine and critically
examines the cited evidence. Sources include
traditional texts, placebo-controlled studies,
published reviews, and contemporary clinical
guidance. In classical practice, remedy selection is
individualized according to the character of pain,
accompanying symptoms, and circumstances that
aggravate or relieve the attack. Such descriptions
clarify how homeopathy is practised, but they are not
evidence that a preparation is effective. In two small
randomized studies, the principal diary outcomes did
not demonstrate a clear benefit over placebo. A
review of headache studies likewise found that
methodological limitations prevented dependable
conclusions. Apparent improvement during treatment
can arise from natural fluctuation in attack frequency,
the therapeutic consultation, changed routines, or
expectations of benefit. Research must distinguish
Vol: 1 | Issue: 4 | September - 2026 these influences from a remedy-specific effect. On
current evidence, homeopathy should not replace
established migraine care. Future trials require
explicit diagnostic standards, equivalent
consultations in both groups, concealed allocation, a
prospectively defined primary outcome such as
monthly migraine days, adequate follow-up, and
systematic safety reporting