Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Teaching complementary medicine offers a way of making teaching more holistic
Complementary and alternative medicine is no longer
an obscure issue in medicine. Our patients are using alternative
therapies in addition to conventional care
1 2
and
sometimes do not share this information with us. But even if they did
would we know how best to advise them about safety issues or about the effectiveness of a particular therapy for their problem? Surveys indicate that doctors and medical students are increasingly interested in complementary and alternative therapy,3-5 yet lack of
knowledge is one of the greatest barriers to its appropriate use.
Although many medical schools and training programmes now include
teaching on complementary and alternative therapies, the approaches are variable and often superficial.
In this issue Owen et al ask provocative questions about our
attitudes and behaviour towards complementary and alternative therapy
(p 154),6 and point out that few of us encountered such
therapy as medical students or during later training. Nevertheless, there are signs of change, and Owen et al describe initiatives to
include complementary and alternative therapy in medical education in
the United Kingdom. Similar changes are occurring in the United States.
In 1995 a national conference on complementary and alternative therapy
education involving the National Institutes of Health recommended that
complementary and alternative therapy should be included in nursing and
medical education. Two years later a survey of all 125 US medical
schools found that 75 of them offered some form of education on
complementary and alternative therapy.7
Teaching includes elective modules, core curriculum lectures, and
inclusion in problem based learning at undergraduate and residency
level. Institutions such as Harvard and Stanford offer continuing
postgraduate education courses, and the universities of Maryland and
Arizona offer research and clinical fellowships. In addition, special
interest groups in complementary and alternative therapy have been
formed in professional organisations such as the Association of
American Medical Colleges, and the Society for Teachers of Family
Medicine has issued guidelines on including complementary and
alternative therapy in the curriculum for residents.8 The
NIH-National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine recently
issued funding initiatives to support the development of teaching on
complementary and alternative therapy in medical, dental, and nursing
education. The centre also supports career development and training
programmes at several of its research centres around the country.
When in 1992 we developed a complementary and alternative therapy
curriculum at the University of Maryland we thought it was important to
present the therapies in the context of their own philosophies and
models of health and illness. Students and residents have the
opportunity to experience the clinical practice of these therapies both
in the community and in our own integrated medical clinic. We also
teach students how to find and evaluate the evidence for the safety and
efficacy of complementary and alternative therapies. Our goal is to
encourage the additional skills of openness, sensitivity to cultural
influences and beliefs, communication, and critical appraisal of the
literature of complementary and alternative therapy treatments.
Nevertheless, great heterogeneity exists in the content, format,
and requirements of complementary and alternative therapy courses for
medical students and physicians in training. Typically, courses give an
overview of the main complementary and alternative therapies and their
uses and possible effects, but they do not teach skills to a clinical
level of competence. Decisions about which complementary and
alternative therapies to include in teaching will necessarily be
dictated by usage patterns and resources in one's locality. However,
guidance about the main complementary and alternative therapy
categories can be obtained from sources such as the National Center for
Complementary and Alternative Medicine (http://nccam.nih.gov). In
addition, however, some general consensus needs to be reached on the
essentials of a core curriculum. This should aim to improve doctors'
knowledge of complementary and alternative therapy practices and their
place in patient care; their ability to advise and guide patients about
these therapies; their ability to refer patients to practitioners of
complementary and alternative therapy; and their knowledge of the
practicalities, such as credentials and legal and reimbursement issues.
Most medical schools have a packed curriculum, so complementary
and alternative therapy options tend to be electives with only a
smattering of core curriculum lectures. Given the shift towards problem
based and case based learning, it is a realistic goal to have
complementary and alternative therapy treatment options integrated into
existing teaching at all levels. This highlights the need for faculty
development. Academics who are not experts in complementary and
alternative therapy but accept its legitimacy at some level must gain
knowledge of the subject in order for students to receive this
exposure. Complementary and alternative therapy educators will need
clearly to define their objectives and goals and be rigorous in
evaluating whether their aims are being met. Nevertheless, until
qualification requirements include components on complementary and
alternative therapy it may seem an indulgence to curriculum committees
and students to dedicate time to complementary and alternative therapy.
We know from research that people are drawn to complementary and
alternative therapy mostly out of a desire for a more humanistic, "holistic" approach.
9 10
Medical education should
re-examine the emphasis it places on the importance of the integration
of mind, body, and spirit and acknowledge the role of social, cultural, and environmental influences and the power of self care and healing. Healthcare professionals, patients, and our healthcare system can only
benefit if medical education bridges the gap with complementary and
alternative therapy.
Complementary Medicine Program, University of Maryland School
of Medicine, 2200 Kernan Drive, Baltimore, MD 21207 (bberman{at}compmed.ummc.umaryland.edu)
| 1. |
Eisenberg DM, Kessler RC, Foster C, Norlock FE, Calkins DR, Delbanco TL.
Unconventional medicine in the United States. Prevalence, costs, and patterns of use.
N Engl J Med
1993;
328:
246-252 |
| 2. |
Fisher P, Ward A.
Complementary medicine in Europe.
BMJ
1994;
309:
107-111 |
| 3. | Reilly DT. Young doctors' views on alternative medicine. BMJ 1983; 287: 337-339. |
| 4. | Berman BM, Singh BB, Hartnoll SM, Singh BK, Reilly D. Primary care physicians and complementary-alternative medicine: training, attitudes, and practice patterns. J Am Board Fam Pract 1998; 11: 272-281[Abstract]. |
| 5. | Berman BM, Singh BK, Lao L, Singh BB, Ferentz KS, Hartnoll SM. Physicians' attitudes toward complementary or alternative medicine: a regional survey. J Am Board Fam Pract 1995; 8: 361-366. |
| 6. |
Owen DK, Lewith G, Stephens CR.
Can doctors respond to patient's increasing interest in complementary and alternative medicine?
BMJ
2001;
322:
154-158 |
| 7. |
Wetzel MS, Eisenberg DM, Kaptchuk TJ.
Courses involving complementary and alternative medicine at US medical schools.
JAMA
1998;
280:
784-787 |
| 8. | Kligler B, Gordon A, Stuart M, Sierpina V. Suggested curriculum guidelines on complementary and alternative medicine: recommendations of the Society of Teachers of Family Medicine Group on Alternative Medicine. Fam Med 2000; 32: 30-33[Medline]. |
| 9. | Vincent C, Furnham A. Why do patients turn to complementary medicine? An empirical study. Br J Clin Psychol 1996; 35: 37-48. |
| 10. |
Astin JA.
Why patients use alternative medicine: results of a national study.
JAMA
1998;
279:
1548-1553 |
the Glasgow experience
Read all Rapid Responses
What can you learn from this BMJ paper? Read Leanne Tite's Paper+