medigraphic.com

2004, Number 3

<< Back Next >>

Rev Med Inst Mex Seguro Soc 2004; 42 (3)

Use of Complimentary and Alternative Medicine. Skepticism with Regard to Western Medicine

Muñoz HO, Durán AL

Language: Spanish
References: 11
Page: 235-238
PDF size: 46.16 Kb.


ABSTRACT

During a long time, debate has remained in relative silence concerning what complementary or alternative medicine can offer to the practice of what has been called Western or conventional medicine. In this article, we explored three aspects: the vision of Western medicine with regard to Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM); the vision of the participation of CAM in the future of medicine, and the place that CAM could have in health services offered within social security institutions. Discussion of these aspects and their extrapolation to the situation of our social security systems in Mexico within the context of the economic pressure that we face led to a search for cost-effective alternatives to allow us to fulfill our mission to provide the insured population with good quality health services. We consider it necessary to establish institutional policies on the following aspects: inclusion in medical school curricula of com-plementary and alternative medicine therapies; incorporation of CAM-proven effective therapies; establishment of mechanisms so that CAM therapies can be introduced within the practice of conventional medicine, and the need to convince the user population to inform physicians on utilization they made of CAM therapies.


REFERENCES

  1. Knipschild P. Evidence and complementary me-dicine. Lancet 2002;359:534.

  2. Barnes J. Quality, efficacy and safety of complemen-tary medicines: fashions, facts and the future. Part II: Efficacy and safety. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2003;554: 331-340.

  3. Frenkel MA, Borkan JM. An approach for inte-grating complementary-alternative medicine into primary care. Fam Pract 2003;20(3):324-332.

  4. Stevenson FA, Britten N, Barry CA, Bradley CP, Barber N. Self-treatment and its discussion in medical consultations: how is medical pluralism managed in practice? Soc Science Med 2003;57(3):513-527.

  5. Cant S, Sharma U. A new medical pluralism? Alternative medicines, doctors, patients and the state. London, England: UCL Press; 1998.

  6. Teramoto S. Doctors’ attitudes to complementary medicine. Lancet 2000;355:501.

  7. Wetzel M, Kaptchuk T, Havamiati A, Eisenberg D. Complementary and alternative therapies: implica-tions for medical education. Ann Intern Med 2003; 138(3):191-196.

  8. Ernst E, Pittler MH, Stevinson C, White A. The desktop guide to complementary and alternative medicine: an evidence-based approach. Edinburgh, Scotland: Mosby 2001. p. 448.

  9. Lewith GT, Breen A, Filshie J, Fisher P, McIntyre M, Mathie RT, Peters D. Complementary medicine: evidence base, competence to practice and regulation. Clin Med 2003;3(3):235-240.

  10. Kelner MJ, Boon H, Wellman B, Welsh S. Comple-mentary and alternative groups contemplate the need for effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness research. Complementary Therapies in Medicine 2002;10(4):235-239.

  11. Vallerand AH, Fouladbakhsh JM, Templin T. The use of complementary/alternative medicine therapies for the self-treatment of pain among residents of urban, suburban, and rural communities. HIV RETURNS: Am J Public Health 2003;93(6):923-925.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com