Quality of complementary and alternative medicine information for type 2 diabetes: a cross-sectional survey and quality assessment of websites.

BACKGROUND: The global prevalence of diabetes mellitus is projected to reach approximately 700 million by the year 2045, with roughly 90-95% of all diabetes cases being type 2 in nature. Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) frequently seek information about complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) online. This study assessed the quality of publicly accessible websites providing consumer health information at the intersection of T2DM and CAM. METHODS: An online search engine (Google) was searched to identify pertinent websites containing information specific to CAM for T2DM patients, and the relevant websites were then screened with an eligibility criteria. Consumer health information found on eligible websites were then assessed for quality using the DISCERN instrument, a 16-item standardized scoring system. RESULTS: Across the 480 webpages identified, 94 unique webpages remained following deduplication, and 37 eligible webpages belonged to and were collapsed into 30 unique websites that were each assessed using the DISCERN instrument. The mean overall quality score (question 16) across all 30 assessed websites was 3.55 (SD = 0.86), and the mean summed DISCERN score was 52.40 (SD = 12.11). Eighty percent of websites presented a wide range of CAM treatment options with the associated benefits/risks of each treatment, but in 56.7% of the websites, the sources used to collect information were unreliable. CONCLUSION: This study identified, assessed, and presents findings on the quality of online CAM information for T2DM. Although there were several high scoring websites, there was variability across most of the individual DISCERN items in the assessed websites. This study highlights the importance of awareness among healthcare providers regarding the reliability of online information about CAM treatment and management options for T2DM. Healthcare providers should be aware of patients' information seeking behaviour, guide them in navigating through the content they encounter online, and provide them with resources containing trustworthy and reliable information.

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

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.

A Systematic Review and Quality Assessment of Breast Cancer Clinical Practice Guidelines Providing Complementary and Alternative Medicine Recommendations.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Up to 80% of patients with breast cancer are reported to use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). Despite this high prevalence, many healthcare providers have little knowledge and education surrounding this topic and may be inadequately prepared to discuss such therapies with their patients. Given this knowledge gap, the purpose of this study was to systematically identify the quantity and assess the quality of CAM recommendations in clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the treatment and/or management of breast cancer. RECENT FINDINGS: Thirty-four CPGs were deemed eligible, 5 of which mentioned CAM, and 4 of which made CAM recommendations. Eligible CPGs containing CAM recommendations were assessed with the AGREE II instrument. Scaled domain percentages from highest to lowest were (% overall, % CAM) as follows: scope and purpose (100.0%, 100.0%), editorial independence (100.0%, 100.0%), clarity of presentation (97.2%, 80.6%), rigour of development (80.2%, 80.2%), stakeholder involvement (88.9%, 77.8%), and applicability (58.3%, 58.3%). CPGs with favourable scores may provide practitioners with guidance on safe and effective use of CAM therapies. A need exists to improve the quality of CAM recommendations in CPGs.

Evaluating traditional and complementary medicines: Where do we go from here?

Traditional and complementary medicines are increasingly considered possible options for prevention and symptomatic treatment of the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. With renewed attention on these therapies from researchers and policy makers alike, the well-documented challenges of evaluating their safety and efficacy are once again of global concern. Between 2005 and 2018, the World Health Organization conducted a series of surveys, in which 88 percent of responding member states confirmed that their biggest challenge in traditional medicine was the need for technical guidance on research and evaluation. As a first step in pursuing this need, our commentary summarizes thirteen international and regional guidance documents by three broad categories on evaluating safety, efficacy, and product quality for market-based approval and distribution of these treatments. We highlight the paucity of updated international recommendations on these subjects and identify gaps that could inform the current evidence base. All available guidance note the need for evidence surrounding the efficacy of these treatments and practices but are also quick to caution against methodological difficulties in the conduct of such evaluations. Evidence suggests that improved evaluation methods on efficacy and effectiveness are crucial toward expanding future research into establishing the cost-effectiveness of these therapies, in the context of shifting acceptance, interest, and integration of traditional medicines into health systems, and as another step toward Universal Health Coverage.

The Presence of Complementary and Alternative Medicine Recommendations in Head and Neck Cancer Guidelines: Systematic Review and Quality Assessment.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: A high proportion of head and neck cancer (HNC) patients use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), however, healthcare professionals generally have little knowledge about the safety and efficacy of these therapies. The purpose of this study was to determine the quantity and assess the quality of CAM recommendations across clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the treatment and/or management of HNC. RECENT FINDINGS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL were systematically searched for HNC CPGs published between 2009 and April 2020; the Guidelines International Network and the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health websites were also were searched. Eligible CPGs containing CAM recommendations were assessed twice with the Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument, once for the overall CPG and once for the CAM sections. Of 305 unique search results, 7 CPGs mentioned CAM and 4 CPGs made CAM recommendations. The overall CPG scored higher than the CAM section for 4 of 6 domains (overall, CAM): scope and purpose (93.8%, 93.8%), clarity of presentation (88.2%, 64.6%), stakeholder involvement (68.8%, 39.6%), rigor of development (58.3%, 34.6%), editorial independence (42.7%, 42.7%), and applicability (51.6%, 19.8%). Quality varied within and between CPGs. Highly scoring CPGs serve as evidence-based resources that clinicians can use to inform their patients about safe and effective CAM use; CPGs achieving variable or lower scores could be improved in future updates based on currently available guideline development/implementation tools. Future research should identify CAM therapies supported by sufficient evidence to be included as part of HNC CPGs.

A systematic review and quality assessment of complementary and alternative medicine recommendations in insomnia clinical practice guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Sleep disorders encompass a wide range of conditions which affect the quality and quantity of sleep, with insomnia being a specific type of sleep disorder of focus in this review. Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is often utilized for various sleep disorders. Approximately 4.5% of individuals diagnosed with insomnia in the United States have used a CAM therapy to treat their condition. This systematic review identifies the quantity and assesses the quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) which contain CAM recommendations for insomnia. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL were systematically searched from 2009 to 2020, along with the Guidelines International Network, the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health website, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, and the Emergency Care Research Institute. CPGs which focused on the treatment and/or management of insomnia in adults were assessed with the Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument. RESULTS: From 277 total results, 250 results were unique, 9 CPGs mentioned CAM for insomnia, and 6 out of the 9 made CAM recommendations relevant to insomnia. Scaled domain percentages from highest to lowest were scope and purpose, clarity of presentation, editorial independence, stakeholder involvement, rigour of development, and applicability. Quality varied within and across CPGs. CONCLUSIONS: The CPGs which contained CAM recommendations for insomnia and which scored well could be used by health care professionals and patients to discuss the use of CAM therapies for the treatment/management of insomnia, while CPGs which scored lower could be improved in future updates according to AGREE II.

Joint AAD-NPF Guidelines of care for the management and treatment of psoriasis with topical therapy and alternative medicine modalities for psoriasis severity measures.

Psoriasis is a chronic, inflammatory, multisystem disease that affects up to 3.2% of the United States population. This guideline addresses important clinical questions that arise in psoriasis management and care and provides recommendations based on the available evidence. The treatment of psoriasis with topical agents and with alternative medicine will be reviewed, emphasizing treatment recommendations and the role of dermatologists in monitoring and educating patients regarding benefits as well as risks that may be associated. This guideline will also address the severity assessment methods of psoriasis in adults.

Recommendations on complementary and alternative medicine within S3 guidelines in oncology: systematic quality assessment of underlying methodology.

PURPOSE: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is used by about half of all patients with cancer. Guidelines are an important tool to introduce evidence-based medicine into routine cancer care. The aim of our study was to assess methodology of the statements and recommendations concerning CAM. METHODS: A systematic assessment of all S3 guidelines published until November 2018 was done. Methodology of all statements and recommendations concerning CAM which were declared as evidence-based was evaluated with respect to international standards. According to the AMSTAR-2 instrument search strategy including filters, searched databases, restrictions to the research question and description of the included studies were examined. In case of adaptations from other guidelines, all underlying guidelines were examined as well. RESULTS: After examining 212 guidelines, 82 evidence-based statements and recommendations regarding CAM could be identified. Four were derived by adaptation, 78 by a de-novo search. Only 11 of 78 (14%) fulfilled all assessment criteria. In 18 (19%) cases no information on search strategy was attainable in any document affiliated to the guideline, in 35 (45%) cases information on search strategy was superficial and in 54 (78%) cases the referred evidence was not presented in adequate detail. CONCLUSIONS: Concerning CAM statements and recommendations within S3 guidelines quality of evidence processing has several shortcomings. Guideline adaptions often lack transparency and traceability.

"Then I went to a hospital abroad": acknowledging implications of stakeholders' differing risk understandings related to use of complementary and alternative medicine in European health care contexts.

BACKGROUND: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is a rather novel issue within public healthcare and health policy-making. CAM use in Europe is widespread, patient-initiated, and patient-evaluated, and the regulation across countries has been evaluated as disharmonized. CAM users are left in an uncertain position, and patient safety may be threatened. How "risk" is understood by individuals in health policy-making and clinical encounters involving the use of CAM has not yet been much debated. The aim of this article is to explore and discuss the existence and possible consequences of differing risk understandings among stakeholders maneuvering in the complex landscape of CAM practice and CAM regulation contextualized by European public healthcare systems. METHODS: Qualitative data were derived from two studies on CAM in European healthcare contexts. Findings from the EU project CAMbrella on legislation and regulation of CAM were mixed with data from an interview study exploring risk understandings, communication, and decision-making among Scandinavian CAM users and their doctors. In a secondary content analysis, we constructed the case Sara as a typology to demonstrate important findings with regard to risk understandings and patient safety involving European citizens' use of CAM in differing contexts. RESULTS: By combining and comparing individual and structural perspectives on risk and CAM use, we revealed underexplored gaps in risk understandings among individuals involved in European CAM regulation and legislation, and between CAM users and their medical doctors. This may cause health risks and uncertainties associated with CAM use and regulation. It may also negatively influence doctor-CAM user communication and CAM users' trust in and use of public healthcare. CONCLUSION: Acknowledging implications of stakeholders' differing risk understandings related to CAM use and regulation may positively influence patient safety in European healthcare. Definitions of the concept of risk should include the factors uncertainty and subjectivity to grasp the full picture of possible risks associated with the use of CAM. To transform the findings of this study into practical settings, we introduce sets of questions relevant to operationalize the important question "What is risk?" in health policy-making, clinical encounters and risk research involving European patients' use of CAM.

Statutory Regulation of Traditional Medicine Practitioners and Practices: The Need for Distinct Policy Making Guidelines.

The World Health Organization (WHO) has called for the increased statutory regulation of traditional and complementary medicine practitioners and practices, currently implemented in about half of nations surveyed. According to recent WHO data, however, the absence of policy guidelines in this area represents a significant barrier to implementation of such professional regulations. This commentary reviews several key challenges that distinguish the statutory regulation of traditional medicine practitioners and practices from biomedical professional regulation, providing a foundation for the development of policy making parameters in this area. Foremost in this regard are the ongoing impacts of the European colonial encounter, which reinforce biomedicine's disproportionate political dominance across the globe despite traditional medicine's ongoing widespread use (particularly in the global South). In this light, the authors discuss the conceptual and historical underpinnings of contemporary professional regulatory structures, the tensions between institutional and informal traditional medicine training pathways, and the policy challenges presented by the prospect of standardizing internally diverse indigenous healing approaches. Epistemic and evidentiary tensions, as well as the policy complexities surrounding the intersection of cultural and clinical considerations, present additional challenges to regulators. Conceptualizing professional regulation as an intellectual property claim under the law, the authors further consider what it means to protect traditional knowledge and prevent misappropriation in this context. Overall, the authors propose that innovative professional regulatory approaches are needed in this area to address safety, quality of care, and accessibility as key public interest concerns, while prioritizing the redress of historical inequities, protection of diverse indigenous knowledges, and delivery of care to underserved populations.

State of the Science: Cancer Complementary and Alternative Medicine Therapeutics Research-NCI Strategic Workshop Highlights of Discussion Report.

In May 2016, the Office of Cancer Complementary and Alternative Medicine, Division of Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment, of the National Cancer Institute convened a special workshop focused on the State of the Science: Cancer Complementary and Alternative Medicine Therapeutics Research. The current state of the science, gaps, and future opportunities were reviewed and discussed by a distinguished panel of experts in this field of research, and the highlights of this meeting are reported herein.

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.

The CUPCIG (CAM-Use in Primary Care in Germany) Study:Part I-Pain. Study Protocol of a Pilot-trial to Assess Feasibility, Acceptability and Perceived Effectiveness of CAM in Pain Disorders in Primary Care.

BACKGROUND: There is limited valid data available on CAM procedures for chronic joint and neuropathic pain in primary care in Germany. Indiviual CAM qualifications of the general practitioners (GPs) and the potential of cost reduction through CAM treatment are almost unknown. The aim of this pilot trial preceding the main study is to examine the survey mode, to estimate the response rate by GPs with or without an additional qualification for CAM, and to identify the status quo in therapeutic approaches for chronic pain disorders in primary care. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study with an ex post facto design among German GPs consisting of 2 parts: In a first step, a pilot trial precedes the main study targeting 200 GPs with and 200 GPs without additional qualification in CAM in a selected region. RESULTS: The results of the CUPCIG study comprise the distribution of pain types treated in primary care practices, the GPs' attitude toward complementary pain therapy, pharmacological or CAM treatment, the estimate of cost reduction through CAM treatment of pain, the application of diverse CAM procedures, and biographical data. DISCUSSION: The CUPCIG study serves to compile pain therapy approaches in primary care in Germany with respect to the individual CAM expertise of the GPs.

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

AIM: To investigate GPs' beliefs about complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) and its role in clinical practice. BACKGROUND: Despite 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. METHOD: A qualitative study conducted on 19 GPs recruited from the North West of England. Semi-structured telephone interviews were analysed using an inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Three themes emerged from the data: limited evidence base, patient demand and concerns over regulation. CONCLUSION: Despite 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.

Dementia: treating patients and caregivers with complementary and alternative medicine--results of a clinical expert conference using the World Café method.

BACKGROUND: In Germany the number of inhabitants with dementia is expected to increase from 1.2 million at present to 2.3 million in 2050. Our aim was to investigate which treatments complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) experts consider to be of therapeutic use in developing treatment strategies and hypotheses for further clinical studies. METHODS: In a participatory group workshop the 'World Café' method was used. As questions we asked: 1) 'Based on your clinical experience, which CAM therapies are effective in the treatment of patients with dementia? 2) Based on your clinical experience, which CAM therapies are effective in the treatment of lay and professional caregivers of patients with dementia?, and 3) How should a CAM treatment program look like?' Further Delphi rounds were used to reach consensus and summarize the results. RESULTS: The 2-day workshop took place in January 2012 in Berlin. A total of 17 experts participated. The most important subject in the treatment was the need to understand patients' biographies in order to individualize the therapy. Therapy itself consists of the therapeutic relationship, nonmedical therapies such as sports, massage, music and arts therapy as well as medical treatment such as herbal or homeopathic medicines. With regard to caregivers the most important aim is to prevent or reduce psychological distress, e.g., by mind-body programs. Instead of single treatments, more general elements such as understanding the patients' biographies, therapeutic relationships, individualizing, networking, and self-care emerged as main results. DISCUSSION: An integrative treatment program should connect outpatient and inpatient care as well as all experts. CAM training courses should be offered to doctors, nurses, and caregivers. Future clinical studies should focus on complex intervention programs integrating these key elements.