Experts’ opinions on terminology for complementary and integrative medicine – a qualitative study with leading experts

BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine

Claudia Witt²  Benno Brinkhaus¹  Christine Holmberg¹ 

[1] Institute for Social Medicine, Epidemiology, and Health Economics, Charité University Medical Center, Luisenstr 57, Berlin, 10117, Germany;University of Maryland School of Medicine, Center for Integrative Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA

关键词: Health care delivery system;    Terminology;    Complementary and alternative medicine;    Integrative medicine;   

Others  :  1231502
DOI  :  10.1186/1472-6882-12-218

 received in 2012-06-08, accepted in 2012-11-09,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

Integrative medicine (IM) is currently the most commonly used term to describe the integration of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) into conventional medicine. In the definitions of IM the most important feature is the focus on evidence as crucial factor for therapeutic decision-making. However, there are discussions on the term “integrative medicine” with the most notable critique from within CAM that it describes the integration of complementary methods into conventional institutions and into a “conventional framework of thinking”. The aim of this qualitative study was to understand the thoughts of leading experts on IM and on the scientific debate in the field as well as their personal opinions about terminology in general.

Methods

We have conducted semi-standardized interviews with ten leading experts in the field of CAM and integrative medicine in the USA, England, and Germany, who have had leading positions at medical schools or the NIH in 2010 and 2011. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analyzed using content analysis with the qualitative analysis software maxqda.

Results

Overall the current terminology was seen as a problem, although most experts agreed that the term “integrative medicine” (IM) described well what they do or they think is useful for medical care. The terminology debate was discussed from four perspectives: 1) from the perspective of medical practice, 2) from the perspective of research, 3) from the perspective of public relations, and 4) from the perspective of health care delivery. These perspectives may be used to evaluate the appropriateness of different terms in use in the field. When interviewees discussed the terminology question, they also discussed the type of health care system they envisioned. Such reflections led the interviewees to caution about too narrow a focus on the terminology question. The question of naming was one about influencing and changing medicine.

Conclusion

The discussion of the experts demonstrated that the discussion about terminology is an important debate about the shaping of medicine. The experts discussed terminology in the light of "how health care systems" should look like in the future.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Holmberg et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]IOM: Integrative Medicine and the Health of the Public: A Summary of the February 2009 Summit. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2009:2009.
• [2]Groene O: Patient centredness and quality improvement efforts in hospitals: rationale, measurement, implementation. Int J Qual Health Care 2011, 5:531-537.
• [3]Lewin SA, Skea ZC, Entwistle V, Zwarenstein M, Dick J: Interventions for providers to promote a patient-centred approach in clinical consultations. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2001, 4:CD003267.
• [4]Mead N, Bower P: Patient-centredness: a conceptual framework and review of the empirical literature. Soc Sci Med 2000, 51(7):1087-1110.
• [5]Horrigan B, Lewis S, BAbrams D, Pechura C: Integrative Medicine in America: How Integrative Medicine is Being Practiced in Clinical Centers Across the United States. Minneapolis: The Bravewell Collaborative; 2012.
• [6]Maizes V, Rakel D, Niemiec C: Integrative medicine and patient-centered care. Explore (NY) 2009, 5(5):277-289.
• [7]Ruggie M: Mainstreaming complementary therapies: new directions in health care. Health Aff (Millwood) 2005, 24(4):980-990.
• [8]Ruggie M, Cohen MH: Integrative Medicine Centers: Moving Health Care in a New Direction. Seminars in Integrative Medicine 2005, 3(1):9-16.
• [9]Walach H: Complementary? Alternative? Integrative? Forsch Komplementmed 2010, 17(4):215-216.
• [10]Gaboury I, Toupin April K, Verhoef M: A qualitative study on the term CAM: is there a need to reinvent the wheel? BMC complementary and alternative medicine 2012, 12(1):131. BioMed Central Full Text
• [11]Melchart D: Welches Fachgebiet akademisieren wir derzeit eigentlich an den Universitäten? – Ein Wort zum Terminologie-Wirrwarr! Forschende Komplementärmedizin/Research in Complementary Medicine 2008, 15(6):308-309.
• [12]Complementary medicine: Time for critical engagement. Lancet 2000, 356(9247):2023.
• [13]Wieland LS, Manheimer E, Berman BM: Development and classification of an operational definition of complementary and alternative medicine for the Cochrane collaboration. Alternative therapies in health and medicine 2011, 17(2):50-59.
• [14]Ludtke R: We need a pluralism of therapies and medicines. Forsch Komplementmed 2010, 17(4):220.
• [15]Sharf BF, Martin PG, Cosgriff-Hernandez K-K, Moore J: Trailblazing health: Institutionalizing and integrating complementary medicine. Patient Educ Couns 2012. in press
• [16]Dobos G: Integrative Medicine – Medicine of the future or ‘Old Wine in New Skins’? European Journal of Integrative Medicine 2009, 1(3):109-115.
• [17]Walach H: "Integrative Medizin" - die Kolonialisierung des Anderen und die Notwendigkeit des ganz Anderen. Forsch Komplementmed 2010, 17(1):4-6.
• [18]Eisenberg DM: Trends in integrative medicine: a U.S. perspective. European Journal of Integrative Medicine 2010, 2:116.
• [19]Heusser P: Integrative Medicine and the Quest for Humanism in Medicine. Forschende Komplementarmedizin 2011, 18(4):172-173.
• [20]Cassidy CM: Some terminology needs for writers, researchers, practitioners, and editors as we move toward integrating medicines. J Altern Complement Med 2008, 14(6):613-615.
• [21]Reiter B: CAM in Europe - ideas and notions. Forsch Komplementmed 2010, 17(3):124-125.
• [22]Weidenhammer W, Lewith G, Falkenberg T, Fonnebo V, Johannessen H, Reiter B, Uehleke B, von Ammon K, Baumhofener F, Brinkhaus B: EU FP7 Project 'CAMbrella' to Build European Research Network for Complementary and Alternative Medicine. Forschende Komplementarmedizin 2011, 18(2):69-76.
• [23]Witt C, Holmberg C: Changing academic medicine – Strategies used by academic leaders of integrative medicine: A qualitative study. eCAMin press
• [24]Angell M, Kassirer JP: Alternative Medicine — The Risks of Untested and Unregulated Remedies. N Engl J Med 1998, 339(12):839-841.
• [25]Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS: Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. 1996. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2007, 455:3-5.
• [26]Caspi O, Sechrest L, Pitluk HC, Marshall CL, Bell IR, Nichter M: On the definition of complementary, alternative, and integrative medicine: societal mega-stereotypes vs. the patients' perspectives. Alternative therapies in health and medicine 2003, 9(6):58-62.