Complementary and Alternative Medicine - Literature review Example

The idea of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is truly a controversial issue in the field of biomedicine practices particularly in the onset of conventional medicine for the past centuries. In this issue, medical practitioners and experts took the center stage, as they have been viewed to have expert ideas concerning the use of either complementary or alternative medicine instead of conventional medicine and vice versa. For this reason, there are varying studies in line with understanding how to address clinical issues relevant to CAM use. The work at hand tries to present studies relevant to this point. In particular, the work at hand provides a critique of the article of OOi-Thye Chong, RN, MPH, and how it relates to the existing studies or literature relevant to the point that this author presents. CAM’s definition Chong’s article (2006), “An integrative approach to addressing clinical issues in complementary and alternative medicine in an outpatient oncology center” started with defining the complementary and alternative medicine. The definition was focused on the composite definition of CAM from the point of view of the Institute of Medicine (IOM). Generally, the definition was centered on how the CAM encompasses health systems particularly in line with modalities, practices and their accompanying theories and beliefs, aside from those intrinsic to the popular health system of a particular society or culture in a given time. This definition is quite broad in its sense, but it tries to cover how the National Institute of Health (NIH) provides a particular definition for conventional medicine, complementary medicine and alternative medicine. The NIH (2013) defines conventional medicines as those promoted by the health practitioners, medical doctors, doctors of osteopathy and their allied health professionals. Therefore, NIH defines any medicines that are not purely in line with what these health practitioners or professionals are promoting could fall under either complementary medicine or alternative medicine. NIH therefore points that at some point, complementary medicine is something that is designed for not so typical approaches together with the conventional medicines. In other words, it acts a special participation in the treatment process together with the conventional medicines. The alternative medicine on the other hand, unlike the complementary medicine, is for non-typical use as a total replacement for conventional medicine. Concerning the above definitions of CAM as stated by NIH and the work of Chong, the former tries to identify a clear definition of what a CAM is, but the former provided definition that tries to cover a broad idea about CAM, which makes it broad to understand. In other words, the work of Chong tries to cover the general point of view of what a CAM is but it does not substantially provide a specific statement concerning the CAM as far as its definition is concerned. Reasons for nondisclosure of CAM use among patients After the definition, Chong is also able to provide some reasons for nondisclosure of CAM use among patients. Chong presents the fact relevant to the existing statistics and literature. Based on the literature, as Chong also points out, there are many reasons why nondisclosure of CAM use among patients exists. Part of these reasons include the perception of CAM as not important for doctors to know, the belief among patients that it is none of the doctor’s business, the thought that doctors would not understand, and the failure of a doctor to ask (Eisenberg et al., 2001). In this point of view, Chong’s article adheres to the point that patients have eventually the relevant freedom as to when they will use CAM for addressing some relevant medical conditions they might have. In this case, Chong is also trying to point out the idea that medical practitioners and experts regarding the conventional medicine should play a crucial role particularly in line with the level of patients’ disclosure of CAM use. This is due to the point that medical doctors for instance will have the chance or opportunity to ask their patients if they are undergoing CAM. At this point, Chong’s literature is literally trying to initiate a point of urging the medical experts of conventional medicine to always consider the information about CAM in their treatment and the level of promotion involved in the use of conventional medicines that are established based on thorough scientific investigations and researches. On the other hand, aside from this, Chong also presents the relevant reasons as to patients’ use of CAM. Reason for CAM use among patients One reason for CAM use among patients is the increase rate of cancer incidence (Chong, 2006). This idea is supported by some relevant studies. For instance, a study reveals that as cancer incidence rates increase, the use of CAM also increases (Richardson et al., 2000). Thus, in general, patients with incurable disease provide higher value for the use of CAM (Burstein, 2000). In the case of cancer patients, CAM use is linked to seeking remedies to supplement conventional medical treatment, so with it, patients desire to feel hopeful, they believe that the methods associated with CAM are nontoxic, they want to take control in the decisions about their medical care, and they expect that CAM will improve their quality of life, boost their immune system and even prolong their lives or relieve their symptoms (Jonas, Horgas & Yoon, 2011). On the other hand, another reasons may potentially link to the point that some patients believe that sophisticated technologies may not be trusted, as they are impersonal and driven by profit; the inability of biomedicine to cure also leads people to use CAM; and the view that CAM is natural and therefore it is more safe than conventional medicine (Burman, 2013). This view so far, has not been remarkably presented by Chong, but the major point of consideration lies on the idea that CAM has been viewed by patients as something to rely on aside from conventional medicine. In this case, the article of Chong substantially presents the thought that CAM has truly received a remarkable popularity. This therefore sounds like urging the medical experts and practitioners to take their stand. Therefore, at the most specific level, it is important to consider the role of the clinical nurse practitioner on this issue. The role of clinical nurse practitioner Nurses are allied health professionals who have the opportunity to bridge the gap between patients and the medical experts with respect to the scientific information relevant to the use of conventional medicine and CAM, a point that Chong strongly adheres to. Chong points out RNs (registered nurses) are the ones to be the frontline medical officers to keep the patients informed concerning the right and wrong about the CAM and the scientific proof in line with the use of conventional medicines. In a most specific way, “CAM allows NHS hospital nurses and midwives to extend their therapeutic repertoire” (Cant, Watts & Ruston, 2011). Therefore, nurses can potentially indeed bridge the gap between the authority of biomedicine and the authority of CAM (Shuval, 2006; Tovey & Broom, 2007). Therefore, the entire article of Chong truly makes a remarkable claim that the clinical nurse practitioners are essential to bridge the gap between medical experts and patients on the matter concerning the use of CAM. Relevant article An article relevant to Chong’s is the study of Tovey and Broom (2007), “Oncologists’ and specialist cancer nurses’ approaches to complementary and alternative medicine and their impact on patient action”. In general, like the point of Chong, this study presents the point that oncologists are crucial to patient engagement with CAM and specialist cancer nurses as powerful mediators between oncologists and patients. However, unlike the point of Chong, the study of Tovey and Broom truly creates an actual evaluation of the patients’ response and their actual perspective on the stand of oncologists for instance on the use of CAM. This study creates more in depth analysis of CAM patients’ behavior suggesting a significant and crucial move on the part of medical experts, practitioners and allied professionals .This article therefore is more empirical in its point of view compared to the points presented by Chong. References Burman, M. E. (2013). Making sense of complementary and alternative medicine: Analysis of a family nurse practitioner program. Retrieved from http://gallery.carnegiefoundation.org/collections/castl_he/mburman/MBurman/Portfolio.html Burstein, H. J. (2000). Discussing complementary therapies with cancer patients: What should we be talking about? Journal of Clinical Oncology, 18(13), 2501-2504. Cant, S., Watts, P., & Ruston, A. (2011). Negotiating competency, professionalism and risk: The integration of complementary and alternative medicine by nurses and midwives in NHS hospitals. Social Science & Medicine, 72(4), 529-536. Chong, O. T. (2006). An integrative approach to addressing clinical issues in complementary and alternative medicine in an outpatient oncology center. Clinical Journal of Oncology Nursing, 10(1), 83-88. Eisenberg, D. M., Kessler, R. C., Van Rompay, M. I., Kaptchuk, T. J., Wilkey, S. A., Appel, S., & Davis, R. B. (2001). Perceptions about complementary therapies relative to conventional therapies among adults who use both: Results from an national survey. Annual Internal Medicine, 135(5), 344-351. Jonas, J., Horgas, A., & Yoon, S. J. (2011). Use of complementary and alternative therapies to manage cancer-related symptoms in hospitalized patients. Journal of Undergraduate Research, 12(3), 1-7. Richardson, M. A., Sanders, T., Palmer, J. L., Greisinger, A., & Singletary, S. E. (2000). Complementary/Alternative medicine use in a comprehensive cancer center and the implications for oncology. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 18(13), 2505-2514. Shuval, J. (2006). Nurses in alternative health care: Integrating medical paradigms. Social Science & Medicine, 63(7), 1784-1795. The National Institute of Health (2013). Complementary, Alternative, or Integrative Health: What’s In a Name. National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCAAM). Retrieved from http://nccam.nih.gov/health/whatiscam Tovey, P., & Broom, A. (2007). Oncologists’ and specialist cancer nurses’ approaches to complementary and alternative medicine and their impact on patient action. Social Science & Medicine, 64(12), 2550-2564. Read More