How Comprehensible, Interesting and Relevant is Current Research in Traditional Chinese Medicine for Practitioners?

Purpose: In traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) as in other fields of complementary medicine, research does not necessarily follow the sequence from in vitro studies via phase I to phase IV clinical trials, but all steps are being investigated simultaneously. Here, we aimed to investigate which kinds of studies were interesting and relevant for practitioners. Methods: Thirty abstracts from articles on TCM published between April and June 2012 were randomly chosen, including 5 abstracts each of in vitro studies, animal studies, case reports or series, studies with healthy volunteers, trials with patients, or reviews and meta-analyses. Six TCM practitioners (2 female, 5 non-medical, average age 46 years, average practical TCM experience 9 years) rated 10 abstracts each on a 5 point Likert scale (1=very poor to 5=very good) regarding comprehensibility, interest, relevance to practice, information for patients, and promoting reputation of TCM. Average ratings for each group of abstracts were calculated. Results: Comprehensibility of the abstracts was generally rated as good. Case reports/series, studies in healthy volunteers and trials with patients were rated interesting by the practitioners (average rating = 3.7, 3.8 and 3.7, respectively). Relevance to practice was mediocre for all types (2.5 to 3.5). In vitro studies and reviews/meta-analyses were not rated useful as information for patients (2.0). Reviews/Meta-analyses were considered negative for the reputation of TCM (2.2). Conclusions: Practitioners of TCM find abstracts of study results generally comprehensible and interesting. Case reports/series were rated in a similar way as trials with patients. Although TCM is commonly taught by means of case reports, practitioners seemed to value clinical trials. Abstracts of reviews/meta-analyses were rated rather uninformative, which was possibly due to several inconclusive results and the lack of detailed information in these abstracts.

How scientific is the science in ethnopharmacology? Historical perspectives and epistemological problems

This commentary is based on a general concern regarding the low level of self-criticism (-evaluation) in the interpretation of molecular pharmacological data published in ethnopharmacology-related journals. Reports on potentially new lead structures or pharmacological effects of medicinal plant extracts are mushrooming. At the same time, nonsense in bioassays is an increasing phenomenon in herbal medicine research. Only because a dataset is reproducible does not imply that it is meaningful. Currently, there are thousands of claims of pharmacological effects of medicinal plants and natural products. It is argued that claims to knowledge in ethnopharmacology, as in the exact sciences, should be rationally criticized if they have empirical content as it is the case with biochemical and pharmacological analyses. Here the major problem is the misemployment of the concentration-effect paradigm and the overinterpretation of data obtained in vitro. Given the almost exponential increase of scientific papers published it may be the moment to adapt to a falsificationist methodology.

The Effectiveness of Alexander Technique on Music Performance and Musicians' Health and Well-being – a Systematic Review

Purpose Musicians often suffer injuries related to their music playing. Therefore, some use the Alexander Technique (AT), a psycho-physical method that helps to release unnecessary muscle tension and re-educates non-beneficial movement patterns through enhanced kinaesthetic awareness. According to a recent review AT may be effective for chronic back pain. This review aimed to evaluate the evidence for the effectiveness of AT lessons on music performance and musicians’ health and well-being. Methods The following electronic databases were searched up to July 2012 for relevant literature: PUBMED, Google Scholar, CINAHL and EMBASE. The search criteria were "Alexander technique" AND "music*" [all fields]. References were searched, and experts and societies of AT or musicians' medicine contacted for further publications. Results 100 studies were identified. 35 studies were included for further analysis, 5 of which were randomised controlled trials (RCTs), 5 controlled but not randomised, 5 not controlled, 5 qualitative case studies, 2 mixed-models (RCT and case studies), 7 surveys, 4 qualitative case reports and 2 unpublished pilot studies. 13 to 72 musicians participated per RCT. In 5 RCTs AT groups received between 12 and 20 one-to-one lessons. In 4 RCTs control groups received no interventions. Primary outcomes were performance anxiety, performance, "use" as well as respiratory function and pain. Performance anxiety decreased by AT in 3 of 4 RCTs. Music performance was improved by AT in 1 RCT, yet in 2 RCTs comparing neurofeedback (NF) to AT, only NF showed improvements. Conclusions To investigate the effectiveness of AT in musicians a variety of study designs and outcome measures have been used. Evidence from RCTs suggests that AT may improve performance anxiety in musicians. Effects on music performance, body use and respiratory function yet remain inconsistent. Future trials with well-established study designs are warranted to further and more reliably explore the potential of AT as a relatively low cost and low risk method in the interest of musicians.

Treatment of iron deficiency with intravenous ferric carboxymaltose in general practice: a retrospective database study.

BACKGROUND Iron deficiency is a frequent problem in general practice. Oral supplementation may in some cases not be well tolerated or not be efficient. Intravenous ferric carboxymaltose may be an alternative for iron supplementation in general practice. The aim of the present study was to analyze the indications for and the efficacy of intravenous ferric carboxymaltose in a primary care center. METHODS We retropectively analyzed electronic data from 173 patients given intravenous ferric carboxymaltose between 2011 and 2013 in primary care center with 18 GPs in Bern, Switzerland. RESULTS Of all patients, 34% were treated intravenously due to an inappropriate increase in ferritin levels after oral therapy, 24% had side effects from oral treatment, 10% were treated intravenously due to the patients explicit wish, and in 39% of all cases, no obvious reason of intravenous instead of oral treatment could be found. Intravenous ferric carboxymaltose led to a significant increase in hemoglobin and serum ferritin levels. Side effects of intravenous treatment were found in 2% of all cases. CONCLUSION We conclude that treatment with intravenous ferric carboxymaltose is an efficient alternative for patients with iron deficiency in general practice, when oral products are not well tolarated or effective. As treatment with iron carboxymaltose is more expensive and potentially dangerous due to side effects, the indication should be placed with (more) care.

A Research Roadmap for Complementary and Alternative Medicine – What We Need to Know by 2020

Background: The CAMbrella coordination action was funded within the Framework Programme 7. Its aim is to provide a research roadmap for clinical and epidemiological research for complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) that is appropriate for the health needs of European citizens and acceptable to their national research institutes and healthcare providers in both public and private sectors. One major issue in the European research agenda is the demographic change and its impact on health care. Our vision for 2020 is that there is an evidence base that enables European citizens to make informed decisions about CAM, both positive and negative. This roadmap proposes a strategic research agenda for the field of CAM designed to address future European health care challenges. This roadmap is based on the results of CAMbrella’s several work packages, literature reviews and expert discussions including a consensus meeting. Methods: We first conducted a systematic literature review on key issues in clinical and epidemiological research in CAM to identify the general concepts, methods and the strengths and weaknesses of current CAM research. These findings were discussed in a workshop (Castellaro, Italy, September 7–9th 2011) with international CAM experts and strategic and methodological recommendations were defined in order to improve the rigor and relevance of CAM research. These recommendations provide the basis for the research roadmap, which was subsequently discussed in a consensus conference (Järna, Sweden, May 9–11th 2012) with all CAMbrella members and the CAMbrella advisory board. The roadmap was revised after this discussion in CAMbrella Work Package (WP) 7 and finally approved by CAMbrella’s scientific steering committee on September 26th 2012. Results: Our main findings show that CAM is very heterogenous in terms of definitions and legal regulations between the European countries. In addition, citizens’ needs and attitudes towards CAM as well as the use and provision of CAM differ significantly between countries. In terms of research methodology, there was consensus that CAM researchers should make use of all the commonly accepted scientific research methods and employ those with utmost diligence combined in a mixed methods framework. Conclusions: We propose 6 core areas of research that should be investigated to achieve a robust knowledge base and to allow stakeholders to make informed decisions. These are: Research into the prevalence of CAM in Europe: Reviews show that we do not know enough about the circumstances in which CAM is used by Europeans. To enable a common European strategic approach, a clear picture of current use is of the utmost importance. Research into differences regarding citizens’ attitudes and needs towards CAM: Citizens are the driver for CAM utilization. Their needs and views on CAM are a key priority, and their interests must be investigated and addressed in future CAM research. Research into safety of CAM: Safety is a key issue for European citizens. CAM is considered safe, but reliable data is scarce although urgently needed in order to assess the risk and cost-benefit ratio of CAM. Research into the comparative effectiveness of CAM: Everybody needs to know in what situation CAM is a reasonable choice. Therefore, we recommend a clear emphasis on concurrent evaluation of the overall effectiveness of CAM as an additional or alternative treatment strategy in real-world settings. Research into effects of context and meaning: The impact of effects of context and meaning on the outcome of CAM treatments must be investigated; it is likely that they are significant. Research into different models of CAM health care integration: There are different models of CAM being integrated into conventional medicine throughout Europe, each with their respective strengths and limitations. These models should be described and concurrently evaluated; innovative models of CAM provision in health care systems should be one focus for CAM research. We also propose a methodological framework for CAM research. We consider that a framework of mixed methodological approaches is likely to yield the most useful information. In this model, all available research strategies including comparative effectiveness research utilising quantitative and qualitative methods should be considered to enable us to secure the greatest density of knowledge possible. Stakeholders, such as citizens, patients and providers, should be involved in every stage of developing the specific and relevant research questions, study design and the assurance of real-world relevance for the research. Furthermore, structural and sufficient financial support for research into CAM is needed to strengthen CAM research capacity if we wish to understand why it remains so popular within the EU. In order to consider employing CAM as part of the solution to the health care, health creation and self-care challenges we face by 2020, it is vital to obtain a robust picture of CAM use and reliable information about its cost, safety and effectiveness in real-world settings. We need to consider the availability, accessibility and affordability of CAM. We need to engage in research excellence and utilise comparative effectiveness approaches and mixed methods to obtain this data. Our recommendations are both strategic and methodological. They are presented for the consideration of researchers and funders while being designed to answer the important and implicit questions posed by EU citizens currently using CAM in apparently increasing numbers. We propose that the EU actively supports an EUwide strategic approach that facilitates the development of CAM research. This could be achieved in the first instance through funding a European CAM coordinating research office dedicated to foster systematic communication between EU governments, public, charitable and industry funders as well as researchers, citizens and other stakeholders. The aim of this office would be to coordinate research strategy developments and research funding opportunities, as well as to document and disseminate international research activities in this field. With the aim to develop sustainability as second step, a European Centre for CAM should be established that takes over the monitoring and further development of a coordinated research strategy for CAM, as well as it should have funds that can be awarded to foster high quality and robust independent research with a focus on citizens health needs and pan-European collaboration. We wish to establish a solid funding for CAM research to adequately inform health care and health creation decision-making throughout the EU. This centre would ensure that our vision of a common, strategic and scientifically rigorous approach to CAM research becomes our legacy and Europe’s reality. We are confident that our recommendations will serve these essential goals for EU citizens.

High prevalence but limited evidence in complementary and alternative medicine: guidelines for future research

The use of complementary and alternative Medicine (CAM) has increased over the past two decades in Europe. Nonetheless, research investigating the evidence to support its use remains limited. The CAMbrella project funded by the European Commission aimed to develop a strategic research agenda starting by systematically evaluating the state of CAM in the EU. CAMbrella involved 9 work packages covering issues such as the definition of CAM; its legal status, provision and use in the EU; and a synthesis of international research perspectives. Based on the work package reports, we developed a strategic and methodologically robust research roadmap based on expert workshops, a systematic Delphi-based process and a final consensus conference. The CAMbrella project suggests six core areas for research to examine the potential contribution of CAM to the health care challenges faced by the EU. These areas include evaluating the prevalence of CAM use in Europe; the EU cititzens’ needs and attitudes regarding CAM; the safety of CAM; the comparative effectiveness of CAM; the effects of meaning and context on CAM outcomes; and different models for integrating CAM into existing health care systems. CAM research should use methods generally accepted in the evaluation of health services, including comparative effectiveness studies and mixed-methods designs. A research strategy is urgently needed, ideally led by a European CAM coordinating research office dedicated to fostering systematic communication between EU governments, the public, charitable and industry funders, researchers and other stakeholders. A European Centre for CAM should also be established to monitor and further a coordinated research strategy with sufficient funds to commission and promote high quality, independent research focusing on the public’s health needs and pan-European collaboration. There is a disparity between highly prevalent use of CAM in Europe and solid knowledge about it. A strategic approach on CAM research should be established to investigate the identified gaps of knowledge and to address upcoming health care challenges.