Does ‘traditional’ evidence have a place in contemporary complementary and alternative medicine practice? A case for the value of such evidence

Criteria for the selection, evaluation and application of traditional knowledge in contemporary health practice, education, research and policy: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Traditional and complementary medicine (T&CM) is highly utilised and draws on traditional knowledge (TK) as evidence, raising a need to explore how TK is currently used.

OBJECTIVES

Examine criteria used to select, evaluate and apply TK in contemporary health contexts.

METHODS

Systematic search utilising academic databases (AMED, CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, SSCI, ProQuest Dissertations Theses Global), Trip clinical database and Google search engine. Citations and reference lists of included articles were searched. Reported use of TK in contemporary settings was mapped against a modified 'Exploration-Preparation-Implementation-Sustainment' (EPIS) implementation framework.

RESULTS

From the 54 included articles, EPIS mapping found TK is primarily used in the Exploration phase of implementation (n = 54), with little reporting on Preparation (n = 16), Implementation process (n = 6) or Sustainment (n = 4) of TK implementation. Criteria used in selection, evaluation and application of TK commonly involved validation with other scientific/traditional evidence sources, or assessment of factors influencing knowledge translation.

DISCUSSION

One of the difficulties in validation of TK (as a co-opted treatment) against other evidence sources is comparing like with like as TK often takes a holistic approach. This complicates further planning and evaluation of implementation.

CONCLUSION

This review identifies important criteria for evaluating current and potential contemporary use of TK, identifying gaps in research and practice for finding, appraising and applying relevant TK studies for clinical care.

An exploration of barriers and enablers to the conduct and application of research among complementary and alternative medicine stakeholders in Australia and New Zealand: A qualitative descriptive study

BACKGROUND

Most studies examining complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) stakeholder engagement with evidence-based practice have relied on quantitative research methods, which often fail to capture the nuances of this phenomena. Using qualitative methods, this study aimed to explore the experiences of CAM stakeholders regarding the barriers and enablers to the conduct and application of research.

METHODS

This research was guided by a qualitative descriptive framework. CAM practitioners and researchers of multiple CAM disciplines from across Australia and New Zealand were invited to share their personal perspectives of the study phenomena. Semi-structured interviews were conducted via Zoom, which were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Rigour strategies were applied to ensure the credibility of results. The transcript was analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

CAM stakeholders identified an array of barriers and enablers to the conduct and application of research within their disciplines. The barriers and enablers that emerged were found to be inter-connected with two similar constructs: capacity and culture. Captured within the construct of capacity were five themes-lack of resources, inadequate governance/leadership, lack of competency, bias directed from outside and within CAM, and lack of time for research. Within the construct of culture were two themes-intrinsic perceptions in CAM, and lack of communication within and outside CAM.

CONCLUSIONS

Promoting evidence-based practice and engaging with research in CAM continues to face challenges. This study, for the first time, has highlighted the multitude of interlinked barriers that confront CAM stakeholders when engaging with research. These findings highlight the need for a concerted and targeted approach to tackle these challenges.

Evidence based practice in traditional & complementary medicine: An agenda for policy, practice, education and research

OBJECTIVE

To develop a policy, practice, education and research agenda for evidence-based practice (EBP) in traditional and complementary medicine (T&CM).

METHODS

The study was a secondary analysis of qualitative data, using the method of roundtable discussion. The sample comprised seventeen experts in EBP and T&CM. The discussion was audio-recorded, and the transcript analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Four central themes emerged from the data; understanding evidence and EBP, drivers of change, interpersonal interaction, and moving forward. Captured within these themes were fifteen sub-themes. These themes/sub-themes translated into three broad calls to action: (1) defining terminology, (2) defining the EBP approach, and (3) fostering social movement. These calls to action formed the framework of the agenda.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis presents a potential framework for an agenda to improve EBP implementation in T&CM. The fundamental elements of this action plan seek clarification, leadership and unification on the issue of EBP in T&CM.