Search

The interest in Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) in the international community is growing. A panel titled 'What Can Comparative Effectiveness Research Contribute to Integrative Health in International Perspective?' took place at the 3rd International Research Congress on Integrative Medicine and Health in Portland, Oregon, in 2012. The presentations at this panel highlighted different perspectives on CER, including the funders' and the stakeholders' perspectives from the United States, as well as experiences with economic evaluations from Australia and pragmatic trials in Europe. The funders' perspective emphasized the need for innovation and controlling costs in large-scale studies. The stakeholder's perspective stressed the need to gather the input of stakeholders in shaping the framework for more informative, more decision-maker-driven research. Several examples of cost-effectiveness analyses were offered from Australia. The importance of balancing rigor and pragmatism was also discussed in a presentation of the efficacy-effectiveness continuum. A wide-ranging discussion explored additional questions concerning the translation of evidence into practice; the effect of pragmatic trials on funding or policy; evidentiary distinctions between and among pragmatic trials and traditional randomized clinical trials; and the multiple roles of stakeholders, particularly in generating new information and knowledge. The presentations and discussions showed that more development of methods is needed. This includes developments on study design and statistical approaches, as well as methods for stakeholder involvement and mechanisms to bring these results into practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The aim of the ‘Acupuncture Model Project of the Techniker Krankenkasse’ was to determine efficacy, effectiveness, safety and cost effectiveness of acupuncture treatment in standard medical care. Methods We evaluated a total of 304 674 patients (34.5% men, aged 53.1?13.8 and 65.5% women, aged 49.5 ± 14.2) who were in the care of over 10000 physicians and received on average 10?3 acupuncture treatments for chronic pain (osteoarthritis of the hip or knee, low back pain, neck pain, headache) during a period of three months. Results and conclusions Our findings demonstrate that for the diagnoses examined, acupuncture in addition to usual care was an effective and safe treatment. Whether the effects of acupuncture can be attributed primarily to specific or nonspecific mechanisms appeared to depend on the diagnosis, and should be investigated in further studies. Using acupuncture as an adjunctive treatment was more expensive than usual care alone, but was cost-effective according to internationally accepted threshold values. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]