Report on the Regulation of Practitioners of Complementary and Alternative Medicine in Ireland

This report has been written in the context of this interest and in response to a request from the Department of Health and Children. It follows a Forum on regulatory issues that was held at the IPA in June 2001 and attended by many CAM practitioners. The Minister for Health and Children asked the Institute to build on the discussions at the Forum by preparing a report on possible options in the regulation of CAM practitioners in Ireland. The focus of the report is on regulatory and policy issues in general. It is not within the Instituteâ?Ts competence or brief to comment on more specific clinical or technical issues. Download the document here

Decision-making in pediatrics: a practical algorithm to evaluate complementary and alternative medicine for children.

We herein present a preliminary practical algorithm for evaluating complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) for children which relies on basic bioethical principles and considers the influence of CAM on global child healthcare. CAM is currently involved in almost all sectors of pediatric care and frequently represents a challenge to the pediatrician. The aim of this article is to provide a decision-making tool to assist the physician, especially as it remains difficult to keep up-to-date with the latest developments in the field. The reasonable application of our algorithm together with common sense should enable the pediatrician to decide whether pediatric (P)-CAM represents potential harm to the patient, and allow ethically sound counseling. In conclusion, we propose a pragmatic algorithm designed to evaluate P-CAM, briefly explain the underlying rationale and give a concrete clinical example.

Offer and use of complementary and alternative medicine in hospitals of the French-speaking part of Switzerland.

BACKGROUND: In 2004, complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) was offered by physicians in one-third of Swiss hospitals. Since then, CAM health policy has changed considerably. This study aimed to describe the present supply and use of CAM in hospitals in the French-speaking part of Switzerland, and to explore qualitatively the characteristics of this offer. METHODS: Between June 2011 and March 2012, a short questionnaire was sent to the medical directors of hospitals (n = 46), asking them whether CAM was offered, where and by whom. Then, a semi-directive interview was conducted with ten CAM therapists. RESULTS: Among 37 responses (return rate 80%), 19 medical directors indicated that their hospital offered at least one CAM and 18 reported that they did not. Acupuncture was the most frequently available CAM, followed by manual therapies, osteopathy and aromatherapy. The disciplines that offered CAM most frequently were rehabilitation, gynaecology and obstetrics, palliative care, psychiatry, and anaesthetics. In eight out of ten interviews, it appeared that the procedures for introducing a CAM in the hospital were not tightly supervised by the hospital and were mainly based on the goodwill of the therapists, rather than clinical/scientific evidence. CONCLUSION: The number of hospitals offering CAM in the French-speaking part of Switzerland seemed to have risen since 2004. The selection of a CAM to be offered in a hospital should be based on the same procedure of evaluation and validation as conventional therapy, and if the safety and efficiency of the CAM is evidence-based, it should receive the same resources as a conventional therapy.

Offer and use of complementary and alternative medicine in hospitals of the French-speaking part of Switzerland.

Background: In 2004, complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) was offered by physicians in one third of Swiss hospitals. Since then, CAM health policy has considerably changed. This study aims at describing the present supply and use of CAM in hospitals of the French-speaking part of Switzerland, and qualitatively explores the characteristics of this supply. Methods: Between June 2011 and March 2012, a short questionnaire was sent to the medical directors of hospitals (N=46), asking them whether a CAM was offered, where and by whom. Then, a semi-directive interview was conducted with 10 CAM therapists. Results: Among 37 responses (return rate 80%), 19 medical directors indicated that their hospital offered at least one CAM and 18 reported that they did not. Acupuncture was the most frequently proposed CAM, followed by manual therapies, osteopathy and aromatherapy. The disciplines that offered CAM most frequently were rehabilitation, gynaecology- obstetrics, palliative care, psychiatry and anaesthesiology. In eight out of ten interviews, it appeared that the procedures for introducing a CAM in the hospital were not tightly supervised by the hospital but were mainly based on the goodwill of the therapists, rather than clinical/scientific evidence. Conclusion: Hospitals offering CAM in the French-speaking part of Switzerland seems to have risen since 2004. The selection of CAM to be offered in a hospital should be based on the same procedure of evaluation and validation as conventional care, and if their safety and efficiency is evidence-based, they should receive the same structural resources.

Push or pull? : The relationship between quality of care and use of complementary and alternative medicine among patients with lung cancer in Sweden

Little is known about relationships between quality of care (QoC) and use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) among patients with lung cancer (LC). Purpose: This study examines CAM-use among patients with LC in Sweden, associations between QoC and CAM-use among these patients, and reported aspects of LC-care perceived as particularly positive and negative by patients, as well as suggestions for improving QoC. Methods: Survey data from 94 patient members of the Swedish LC patient organization about CAM-use and QoC as measured by the instrument “Quality from the patient’s perspective” were analyzed. Results: Fifty (53%) LC-patients used CAM, with 40 of the CAM-users reporting that CAM helped them. The most common CAMs used were dietary supplements and natural remedies, followed by prayer. Significantly more patients reported using prayer and meditation for cure than was the case for other types of CAM used. Less than half the CAM-users reported having spoken with staff from the biomedical health care system about their CAM-use. Patients provided numerous suggestions for improving LC-care in a variety of areas, aiming at a more effective and cohesive care trajectory. No differences in QoC were found between CAM-users and non-CAM-users, but differences in CAM-use i.e. type of CAM, reasons for using CAM, and CAM-provider consulted could be associated with different experiences of care. Conclusions: It is important to recognize that CAM-users are not a homogeneous group but might seek different types of CAMs and CAM-providers in different situations depending on experiences of care.

How should complementary and alternative medicine be taught to medical students in Switzerland? A survey of medical experts and students

In Switzerland and in the whole western world, the growing popularity of CAM is calling for its implementation in the undergraduate medical curriculum.

How many cancer patients use complementary and alternative medicine: a systematic review and metaanalysis

Background. No comprehensive systematic review has been published since 1998 about the frequency with which cancer patients use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). Methods. MEDLINE, AMED, and Embase databases were searched for surveys published until January 2009. Surveys conducted in Australia, Canada, Europe, New Zealand, and the United States with at least 100 adult cancer patients were included. Detailed information on methods and results was independently extracted by 2 reviewers. Methodological quality was assessed using a criteria list developed according to the STROBE guideline. Exploratory random effects metaanalysis and metaregression were applied. Results. Studies from 18 countries (152; >65 000 cancer patients) were included. Heterogeneity of CAM use was high and to some extent explained by differences in survey methods. The combined prevalence for “current use” of CAM across all studies was 40%. The highest was in the United States and the lowest in Italy and the Netherlands. Metaanalysis suggested an increase in CAM use from an estimated 25% in the 1970s and 1980s to more than 32% in the 1990s and to 49% after 2000. Conclusions. The overall prevalence of CAM use found was lower than often claimed. However, there was some evidence that the use has increased considerably over the past years. Therefore, the health care systems ought to implement clear strategies of how to deal with this. To improve the validity and reporting of future surveys, the authors suggest criteria for methodological quality that should be fulfilled and reporting standards that should be required.

The supply of complementary and alternative medicine in Swiss hospitals

OBJECTIVES: Over the past few years, a considerable increase in complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) has been observed, particularly in primary care. In contrast little is known about the supply of CAM in Swiss hospitals. This study aims at the investigation of amount and structure of CAM activities of Swiss hospitals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We designed a cross-sectional survey using a 2-step, questionnaire- based approach acquiring overview information form hospital managers in a first questionnaire leading to detailed information on CAM usage at medical department level (head of department). This second questionnaire provides data of physician-based and non-physician-based CAM supply. RESULTS: The size of hospitals was significantly associated with the provision of CAM. 33% of the hospital managers indicated 1 or more medical doctor (MD) using CAM in their hospital compared to 37% of confirmation on department level (Kappa value 0.5). Mostly different CAM methods were applied. Acupuncture was used most frequently. However only 13 hospitals (11%) occupied more than 3 CAM MDs and only 5 hospitals had more than 2 full-time equivalents for MDs. Furthermore, 74.7% of these personnel resources were dedicated for outpatient care. In terms of CAM methods anthroposophic medicine accounted for more than half of the total personnel costs. On the other hand usage of non-physician based CAM accounted for 41% according to hospital managers compared to 64% of CAM usage according to medical departments (Kappa values 0.31). Reflexology of the foot was used most frequently. CONCLUSION: Total supply of CAM in Swiss hospitals is low and concentrates on few hospitals. Acupuncture is the widest spread discipline but anthroposophic medicine spends the most resources. The study shows that a high patient demand for CAM faces low supply in hospitals.

Extent and structure of health insurance expenditures for complementary and alternative medicine in Swiss primary care

BACKGROUND: The study is part of a nationwide evaluation of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in primary care in Switzerland. The goal was to evaluate the extent and structure of basic health insurance expenditures for complementary and alternative medicine in Swiss primary care. METHODS: The study was designed as a cross-sectional evaluation of Swiss primary care providers and included 262 certified CAM physicians, 151 noncertified CAM physicians and 172 conventional physicians. The study was based on data from a mailed questionnaire and on reimbursement information obtained from health insurers. It was therefore purely observational, without interference into diagnostic and therapeutic procedures applied or prescribed by physicians. Main outcome measures included average reimbursed costs per patient, structured into consultation- and medication-related costs, and referred costs. RESULTS: Total average reimbursed cost per patient did not differ between CAM physicians and conventional practitioners, but considerable differences were observed in cost structure. The proportions of reimbursed costs for consultation time were 56% for certified CAM, 41% for noncertified CAM physicians and 40% for conventional physicians; medication costs--including expenditures for prescriptions and directly dispensed drugs--respectively accounted for 35%, 18%, and 51% of costs. CONCLUSION: The results indicate no significant difference for overall treatment cost per patient between CAM and COM primary care in Switzerland. However, CAM physicians treat lower numbers of patients and a more cost-favourable patient population than conventional physicians. Differences in cost structure reflect more patient-centred and individualized treatment modalities of CAM physicians.

Complementary and alternative medicine costs - a systematic literature review

Objective: The aim of this literature review, performed within the framework of the Swiss governmental Program of Evaluation of Complementary Medicine (PEK), was to investigate costs of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). Materials and Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in 11 electronic databases. All retrieved titles and reference lists were also hand-searched. Results: 38 publications were found: 23 on CAM of various definitions (medical and non-medical practitioners, over-the-counter products), 13 on homeopathy, 2 on phytotherapy. Studies investigated different kinds of costs (direct or indirect) and used different methods (prospective or retrospective questionnaires, data analyses, cost-effectiveness models). Most studies report 'out of pocket' costs, because CAM is usually not covered by health insurance. Costs per CAM-treatment / patient / month were AUD 7-66, CAD 250 and GBP 13.62 +/- 1.61. Costs per treatment were EUR 205 (range: 15-1,278), USD 414 +/- 269 and USD 1,127. In two analyses phytotherapy proved to be cost-effective. One study revealed a reduction of 1.5 days of absenteeism from work in the CAM group compared to conventionally treated patients. Another study, performed by a health insurance company reported a slight increase in direct costs for CAM. Costs for CAM covered by insurance companies amounted to approximately 0.2-0.5% of the total healthcare budget (Switzerland, 2003). Publications had several limitations, e.g. efficacy of therapies was rarely reported. As compared to conventional patients, CAM patients tend to cause lower costs. Conclusion: Results suggest lower costs for CAM than for conventional patients, but the limited methodological quality lowers the significance of the available data. Further well-designed studies and models are required.