Ethical implications of the increasing use of complementary and alternative medicine

Non-conventional practice versus evidence-based medicine. A scientific and ethical analysis of the Italian regulation

BACKGROUND

The current lack of scientific validation of non-conventional treatments in medicine, whose epistemological foundations lie in scientific evidence and experimentation, raises significant questions regarding the costs and benefits of alternative-treatment forms. Nonetheless, in the last few decades non-conventional treatments have been increasingly recognised by the Italian medical profession, with one regional healthcare administration adopting some non-conventional practices as part of its conventional healthcare services.

AIMS

The Authors aim to analyse non-conventional treatments in medicine from an epistemological, cultural, ethical, political and economic point of view, in order to highlight criticalities and incongruities, especially when these treatments are approved by a public healthcare system, which should be grounded on the "evidence-based medicine" principle.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-conventional treatments in medicine are constituted by meta-theories, i.e. philosophical, religious and ideological concepts that conflict with contemporary rational, empirical medicine. In the interest of patients and society, the paper stresses the incongruity of a healthcare system which, despite being grounded on the "evidence-based medicine" principle, allows the development of non conventional treatments. Having said that, medical science should address not only the biological domain of illness but also its existential implications. Awareness and respect for the individual experience can undoubtedly lead to a new medical model that allows for a more effective therapeutic intervention.

Professional ethics in complementary and alternative medicines in management of Parkinson's disease

The practice of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is not, at present, considered an integral part of conventional medicine. As the popularity of CAM grows and access to information about CAM increases through the media and internet where CAMs are often promoted, patients are at risk of exposure unvalidated information. Therefore, there is a need for physicians to examine objectively the efficacy and safety of CAM, compare it with current medications, and become actively involved in the CAM treatment with patients. In accordance with these needs, this manuscript reviews the utility, scientific evidence, safety and cost-effectiveness of CAM in the treatment of Parkinson's disease (PD). We also address the ethical issues of CAM practices.

Complementary medicine for cancer patients in general practice: qualitative interviews with german general practitioners

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to investigate how general practitioners react when their cancer patients show interest in complementary medicine, and how their reaction is related to their knowledge in the field.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews with 10 German general practitioners. Interviewees came from 5 different federal states and varied in terms of urban/rural setting, single/joint practice, additional certifications, gender and length of professional experience. Interviews were electronically recorded, transcribed and then analysed using qualitative content analysis according to Mayring.

RESULTS

General practitioners feel largely responsible for providing information on complementary medicine to their cancer patients. However, uncertainty and a lack of knowledge concerning CAM lead mainly to reactive responses to patients' needs, and the general practitioners base their recommendations on personal experiences and attitudes. They wish to support their cancer patients and thus, in order to keep their patients' hopes up and maintain a trusting relationship, sometimes support complementary medicine, regardless of their own convictions.

CONCLUSION

Although general practitioners see themselves as an important source of information on complementary medicine for their cancer patients, they also speak of their uncertainties and lack of knowledge. General practitioners would profit from training in complementary medicine enabling them to discuss this topic with their cancer patients in a proactive, open and honest manner.