바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기
 
 

logo

  • ENGLISH
  • P-ISSN3022-6805
  • E-ISSN3022-6791
  • KCI

ISSN : 3022-6805

논문 상세

다음
논문 투고

Vol.6 No.3

PDF Citation Share

Evidence based practice within the complementary medicine context

셀메드 / CELLMED, (P)3022-6805; (E)3022-6791
2016, v.6 no.3, pp.15-15
Lisa McLean (Charles Sturt University)
Peter Steve Micalos (Charles Sturt University)
Rhett McClean (Charles Sturt University)
Sok Cheon Pak (Charles Sturt University)
Lisa, M. , Peter, S. M. , Rhett, M. , & Sok, C. P. (2016). . , 6(3), 15-15.

Abstract

Evidence based practice (EBP) is a system of applying the most current and valid high quality evidence to support clinical decision making in a healthcare setting. In the twenty five years since its inception, EBP has become the accepted benchmark for excellence in healthcare. Although the system emerged within the biomedical sciences, in the years since EBP has become normative across all healthcare modalities from dentistry, allied health to complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). Practicing evidence based medicine within any modality potentially offers the patient the best available care based on high quality evidence. Yet it is the nature of the evidence that provokes some questions about the suitability of EBP across all modalities of healthcare. The meta analysis of randomized controlled trial (RCT) stands at the pinnacle of the hierarchy of evidence in EBP. This forms a challenge to CAM due to the difficulty in reducing the elementals of a holistic naturopathic assessment of a patient into an answerable question to be tested within a RCT. On one level this makes EBP paradigmatically incompatible with CAM, yet on another level it presents the opportunity to redefine the parameters of what is considered high level evidence. EBP has become a tool, and at times a weapon wielded by governments and health insurance companies to direct healthcare funding and policy. The implications of the nature of accepted evidence are becoming far reaching. The pursuit of the best available healthcare for each individual is the focus of EBP. However, the injudicious use of this system to direct health policy is fraught with biomedical bias and dominance. This issue raises the challenge to CAM to present high level evidence according to the rules of evidence, or face the annihilation of centuries of empirical knowledge.

keywords
Evidence based practice, complementary and alternative medicine, randomized controlled trial

참고문헌

1.

Baer H. Towards and integrative medicine: Merging alternative therapies with biomedicine. (Walnut Creek, USA: Altamire Press), 2004.

2.

Barry CA. The role of evidence in alternative medicine:Contrasting biomedical and anthropological approaches. Soc Sci Med. 2006;62:2646-2657.

3.

Bensoussan A, Lewith GT. Complementary medicine research in Australia: a strategy for the future. Med J Aust. 2004;181:331-333.

4.

Chalmers I, Enkin M, Keirse M. Effective care in pregnancy and childbirth. (Oxford, England: Oxford University Press), 1989.

5.

Churchill W. Implications of evidence based medicine for complementary and alternative medicine. J Chin Med. 1999;59:32-35.

6.

COAG. National Health Reform Agreement. (Canberra, Australia: Commonwealth of Australia), 2015.

7.

Choosing Wisely Australia. What is choosing wisely Australia:Choosing Wisely Australia. 2015. Available at:http://www.choosingwisely.org.au/about-choosing-wiselyaustralia/what-is-choosing-wisely-australia. (accessed on 10th August 2016).

8.

Cochrane Collaboration. 2015. Available at:http://www.cochrane.org/about-us/our-vision-mission-and-principles (accessed on 10th August 2016).

9.

Dawes M. Evidence-based practice: A primer for health care professionals. (Edinburgh, Scotland: Elsevier Churchill Livingstone), 2005.

10.

Ernst E, Cohen MH, Stone J. Ethical problems arising in evidence based complementary and alternative medicine. J Med Ethics. 2004;30:156-159.

11.

Farnsworth NR, Akerele O, Bingel AS, Soejart DD, Guo Z. Medicinal plants in therapy. Bull World Health Organ. 1985;63:965-981.

12.

Guyatt G. Evidence-based medicine. ACP Journal Club. 1991;A16:114.

13.

Holmes D, Murray SJ, Perron A, Rail G. Deconstructing the evidence-based discourse in health sciences: truth, power and fascism. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2006;4:180-186.

14.

Jagtenberg T, Evans S, Grant A, Howden I, Lewis M, Singer J. Evidence-based medicine and naturopathy. J Altern Complement Med. 2006;12:323-328.

15.

Melnyk BM, Fineout-Overholt E. Evidence Based Practice in Nursing and Healthcare. A Guide to Best Practice. (Philadelphia, USA: Wolters Kluwer Health), 2015.

16.

Myers SP. The Nature of Science. J Comp Med. 2002;1:37-51.

17.

NHMRC. Frequently asked questions arising from public consultation: NHMRC advice of the effectiveness of homeopathy for treating health conditions. (Canberra, Australia:National Health and Medical Research Council), 2015.

18.

NICM. Submission to the Australian Government rebate on private health insurance for natural therapies. (Sydney, Australia: National Institute of Complementary Medicine), 2013.

19.

NPS. NPS Medicine Wise. 2015. Available at:http://www.nps.org.au (accessed on 10th August 2016).

20.

Rycroft-Malone J, Seers K, Titchen A, Harvey G, Kitson A, McCormack B. What counts as evidence in evidence-based practice?. J Adv Nurs. 2004;47:81-90.

21.

Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ. 1996;312:71-72.

22.

Sarris J. Whole system research of naturopathy and medical herbalism for improving mood and reducing anxiety. Aust J Med Herb. 2011;23:116-119.

셀메드

논문 투고 OA 정책