scholarly journals Complementary and Alternative Medicine in Clinical Practice Guideline for Insomnia

2016 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 235-248
Author(s):  
Chang-Young Kwon ◽  
Hyo-Weon Suh ◽  
Eun-Ji Choi ◽  
Sun-Yong Chung ◽  
Jong-Woo Kim
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Alternative Medicine ◽  
Complementary And Alternative Medicine ◽  
Clinical Practice Guideline ◽  
Practice Guideline ◽  
Complementary And Alternative

Addressing Complementary and Alternative Medicine Use Among Individuals With Cancer: an Integrative Review and Clinical Practice Guideline

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lynda G Balneaves ◽  
Cody Z Watling ◽  
Emilie N Hayward ◽  
Brenda Ross ◽  
Jill Taylor-Brown ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Alternative Medicine ◽  
Complementary And Alternative Medicine ◽  
Clinical Practice Guideline ◽  
Practice Guideline ◽  
Informed Decision ◽  
Integrative Review ◽  
Informed Decision Making ◽  
Cam Use

Abstract Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use is common among individuals with cancer, but many choose not to discuss CAM with healthcare providers (HCPs). Moreover, there is variability in the provision of evidence-informed decision making about CAM use. A clinical practice guideline was developed to standardize how oncology HCPs address CAM use as well as to inform how individuals with cancer can be supported in making evidence-informed decisions about CAM. An integrative review of the literature, from inception to December 31st, 2018, was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO, CINAHL, and AMED databases. Eligible articles included oncology HCPs’ practice related to discussing, assessing, documenting, providing decision support, or offering information about CAM. Two authors independently searched the literature and selected articles were summarised. Recommendations for clinical practice were formulated from the appraised evidence and clinical experiences of the research team. An expert panel reviewed the guideline for usability and appropriateness and recommendations were finalised. The majority of the 30 studies eligible for inclusion were either observational or qualitative, with only three being reviews and three being experimental. From the literature, seven practice recommendations were formulated for oncology HCPs regarding how to address CAM use by individuals with cancer, including communicating, assessing, educating, decision-coaching, documenting, active monitoring, and adverse event reporting. It is imperative for safe and comprehensive care that oncology HCPs address CAM use as part of standard practice. This clinical practice guideline offers directions on how to support evidence-informed decision making about CAM among individuals with cancer.

General practitioners’ beliefs about the clinical utility of complementary and alternative medicine

2014 ◽  
Vol 16 (03) ◽  
pp. 246-253 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aron Jarvis ◽  
Rachel Perry ◽  
Debbie Smith ◽  
Rohini Terry ◽  
Sarah Peters
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Alternative Medicine ◽  
Complementary And Alternative Medicine ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Limited Evidence ◽  
North West ◽  
Telephone Interviews ◽  
The North ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Complementary And Alternative

AimTo investigate GPs’ beliefs about complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) and its role in clinical practice.BackgroundDespite the prevalence of CAM in the United Kingdom, little is known about GPs beliefs regarding these alternative approaches to patient management and how they view it in relation to their clinical conduct and practice.MethodA qualitative study conducted on 19 GPs recruited from the North West of England. Semi-structured telephone interviews were analysed using an inductive thematic analysis.ResultsThree themes emerged from the data: limited evidence base, patient demand and concerns over regulation.ConclusionDespite recognising the limited evidence base of CAM, GPs continue to see a role for it within clinical practice. This is not necessarily led by patient demand that is highly related to affluence. However, GPs raised concerns over the regulation of CAM practitioners and CAM therapies.

scholarly journals Headache and migraine clinical practice guidelines: a systematic review and assessment of complementary and alternative medicine recommendations

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy Y. Ng ◽  
Christina Hanna
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Alternative Medicine ◽  
Complementary And Alternative Medicine ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Stakeholder Involvement ◽  
Headache Disorder ◽  
Agree Ii ◽  
Agree Ii Instrument ◽  
Complementary And Alternative

Abstract Background Globally, 3 billion people suffer from either migraine or tension-type headache disorder over their lifetime. Approximately 50% of American adults suffering from headache or migraine have used complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), however, the quality and quantity of recommendations associated with such therapies across clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the treatment and/or management of these conditions are unknown. The purpose of this study was to identify the quantity and assess the quality of such CAM recommendations. Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL were systematically searched from 2009 to April 2020; the Guidelines International Network and the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health websites were also searched for eligible CPGs. CPGs were included if they provided any therapy recommendations. Eligible CPGs included those written for adult patients with headache and migraine; CPGs containing CAM recommendations were assessed twice for quality using the AGREE II instrument, once for the overall CPG and once for the CAM sections. Results Of 486 unique search results, 21 CPGs were eligible and quality assessed; fifteen CPGs mentioned CAM, of which 13 CPGs made CAM recommendations. The overall CPG assessment yielded higher scaled domain percentages than the CAM section across all domains. The results from highest to lowest were as follows (overall, CAM): clarity of presentation (66.7% vs. 50.0%), scope and purpose (63.9% vs. 61.1%), stakeholder involvement (22.2% vs. 13.9%), rigour of development (13.5% vs. 9.4%), applicability (6.3% vs. 0.0%), and editorial independence (0.0% vs. 0.0%). Conclusions Of the eligible CPGs, the CAM sections were of lower quality compared to the overall recommendations across all domains of the AGREE II instrument. CPGs that scored well could serve as a framework for discussion between patients and healthcare professionals regarding use of CAM therapies in the context of headache and migraine.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document