Search

The article discusses the collaboration between the Society for Integrative Oncology (SIO) and the American Society for Clinical Oncology (ASCO) to formulate the published pain management guideline. Topics include purpose of the guideline, recommendations by the Society for Acupuncture Research (SAR) on acupuncture, and importance of effective dissemination and implementation of the guideline.

The article discusses an initial framework for a standards for reporting interventions in clinical trials of acupuncture using animal models adaptation. Other topics include the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) checklist for reporting clinical research, the Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) guidelines, and the Standards for Reporting Interventions in Clinical Trials of Acupunctures (STRICTA) recommendations.

Background: Selective reporting of outcomes in clinical trials is a serious problem. We aimed to investigate the influence of the peer review process within biomedical journals on reporting of primary outcome(s) and statistical analyses within reports of randomised trials.Methods: Each month, PubMed (May 2014 to April 2015) was searched to identify primary reports of randomised trials published in six high-impact general and 12 high-impact specialty journals. The corresponding author of each trial was invited to complete an online survey asking authors about changes made to their manuscript as part of the peer review process. Our main outcomes were to assess: (1) the nature and extent of changes as part of the peer review process, in relation to reporting of the primary outcome(s) and/or primary statistical analysis; (2) how often authors followed these requests; and (3) whether this was related to specific journal or trial characteristics.Results: Of 893 corresponding authors who were invited to take part in the online survey 258 (29%) responded. The majority of trials were multicentre (n = 191; 74%); median sample size 325 (IQR 138 to 1010). The primary outcome was clearly defined in 92% (n = 238), of which the direction of treatment effect was statistically significant in 49%. The majority responded (1-10 Likert scale) they were satisfied with the overall handling (mean 8.6, SD 1.5) and quality of peer review (mean 8.5, SD 1.5) of their manuscript. Only 3% (n = 8) said that the editor or peer reviewers had asked them to change or clarify the trial's primary outcome. However, 27% (n = 69) reported they were asked to change or clarify the statistical analysis of the primary outcome; most had fulfilled the request, the main motivation being to improve the statistical methods (n = 38; 55%) or avoid rejection (n = 30; 44%). Overall, there was little association between authors being asked to make this change and the type of journal, intervention, significance of the primary outcome, or funding source. Thirty-six percent (n = 94) of authors had been asked to include additional analyses that had not been included in the original manuscript; in 77% (n = 72) these were not pre-specified in the protocol. Twenty-three percent (n = 60) had been asked to modify their overall conclusion, usually (n = 53; 88%) to provide a more cautious conclusion.Conclusion: Overall, most changes, as a result of the peer review process, resulted in improvements to the published manuscript; there was little evidence of a negative impact in terms of post hoc changes of the primary outcome. However, some suggested changes might be considered inappropriate, such as unplanned additional analyses, and should be discouraged. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research into acupuncture has had ripple effects beyond the field of acupuncture. This paper identifies five exemplars to illustrate that there is tangible evidence of the way insights gleaned from acupuncture research have informed biomedical research, practice, or policy. The first exemplar documents how early research into acupuncture analgesia has expanded into neuroimaging research, broadening physiologic understanding and treatment of chronic pain. The second describes how the acupuncture needle has become a tool to enhance biomedical knowledge of connective tissue. The third exemplar, which illustrates use of a modified acupuncture needle as a sham device, focuses on emergent understanding of placebo effects and, in turn, on insights into therapeutic encounters in treatments unrelated to acupuncture. The fourth exemplar documents that two medical devices now in widespread use were inspired by acupuncture: transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulators for pain control and antinausea wrist bands. The final exemplar describes how pragmatic clinical trial designs applied in acupuncture research have informed current general interest in comparative effectiveness research. In conclusion, these exemplars of unanticipated outcomes of acupuncture research comprise an additional rationale for continued support of basic and clinical research evaluating acupuncture and other under-researched therapies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. Little is known about Tibetan medicine (TM), in Western industrialized countries. Objectives. To provide a systematic review of the clinical studies on TM available in the West. Data Sources. Seven literature databases, published literature lists, citation tracking, and contacts to experts and institutions. Study Eligibility Criteria. Studies in English, German, French, or Spanish presenting clinical trial results. Participants. All patients of the included studies. Interventions. Tibetan medicine treatment. Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods. Included studies were described quantitatively; their quality was assessed with the DIMDI HTA checklist; for RCTs the Jadad score was used. Results. 40 studies from 39 publications were included. They were very heterogeneous regarding study type and size, treated conditions, treatments, measured outcomes, and quality. Limitations. No Russian, Tibetan, or Chinese publications were included. Possible publication bias. Conclusions. The number of clinical trials on TM available in the West is small; methods and results are heterogeneous. Implications of Key Findings. Higher quality larger trials are needed, as is a general overview of traditional usage to inform future clinical trials. Systematic Review Registration Number. None. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The offer of "integrative oncology" is one option for clinics to provide safe and evidence-based complementary medicine treatments to cancer patients. As known from merger theories, corporate culture and integration models have a strong influence on the success of such integration. To identify relevant corporate culture aspects that might influence the success in two highly visible integrative oncology clinics, we interviewed physicians, nurses, practitioners, and managers. All interviews (11 in a German breast cancer clinic and 9 in an integrative medicine cancer service in the USA) were audio-recorded, transcribed and analyzed with content analysis. According to the theoretical framework of mergers, each clinic selected a different integration type ("best of both worlds" and "linking"). Nonetheless, each developed a similar corporate culture that has a strong focus on research and safe and evidence-based treatments, and fosters a holistic and patient-centered approach. Structured communication within the team and with other departments had high relevance. Research was highlighted as a way to open doors and to facilitate a more general acceptance within the hospital. Conventional physicians felt unburdened by the provision of integrative medicine service but also saw problems in the time required for scheduled treatments, which often resulted in long waiting lists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The effectiveness of injection therapy for low-back pain is still debatable. We compared the efficacy of local injections of the homeopathic preparation Disci/Rhus toxicodendron compositum (verum) with placebo injections and with no treatment in patients with chronic low back pain. Methodology/Principal Findings: In a randomized controlled partly double blind multicenter trial patients with chronic low back pain from 9 German outpatient clinics were enrolled and randomly allocated in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive subcutaneous injections (verum or placebo) into painful sites on the lower back over 12 treatment sessions within eight weeks, or no treatment (rescue pain medication with paracetamol or NSAIDs). All trial personnel and participants were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome measure was the average pain intensity over the last seven days on a visual analogue scale (0-100 mm, 0 = no pain, 100 = worst imaginable pain) after eight weeks. Follow-up was 26 weeks. Primary analysis was by intention to treat. Between August 2007 and June 2008, 150 patients were randomly allocated to three groups (51 verum, 48 placebo and 51 no treatment). The mean baseline-adjusted low back pain intensity at week eight was: verum group 37.0 mm (97.5% CI 25.3;48.8), no treatment group 53.0 (41.8;64.2), and placebo group 41.8 (30.1;53.6). The verum was significantly superior to no treatment (P = 0.001), but not to placebo (P = 0.350). No significant side effects were reported. Conclusions/Significance: The homeopathic preparation was not superior to placebo. Compared to no treatment injections resulted in significant and clinical relevant chronic back pain relief. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Anthroposophic medicine is a physician-provided complementary therapy system involving counselling, artistic and physical therapies, and special medications. The purpose of this analysis was to identify predictors of symptom improvement in patients receiving anthroposophic treatment for chronic diseases. Methods: 913 adult outpatients from Germany participated in a prospective cohort study. Patients were starting anthroposophic treatment for mental (30.4% of patients, n = 278/913), musculoskeletal (20.2%), neurological (7.6%), genitourinary (7.4%) or respiratory disorders (7.2%) or other chronic indications. Stepwise multiple linear regression analysis was performed with the improvement of Symptom Score (patients' assessment, 0: not present, 10: worst possible) after 6 and 12 months as dependent variables. 61 independent variables pertaining to sociodemographics, life style, disease status, co-morbidity, health status (SF-36), depression, and therapy factors were analysed. Results: Compared to baseline, Symptom Score improved by average 2.53 points (95% confidence interval 2.39- 2.68, p < 0.001) after six months and by 2.49 points (2.32-2.65, p < 0.001) after 12 months. The strongest predictor for improvement after six months was baseline Symptom Score, which alone accounted for 25% of the variance (total model 32%). Improvement after six months was also positively predicted by better physical function, better general health, shorter disease duration, higher education level, a diagnosis of respiratory disorders, and by a higher therapy goal documented by the physician at baseline; and negatively predicted by the number of physiotherapy sessions in the pre-study year and by a diagnosis of genitourinary disorders. Seven of these nine variables (not the two diagnoses) also predicted improvement after 12 months. When repeating the 0-6 month analysis on two random subsamples of the original sample, three variables (baseline Symptom Score, physical function, general health) remained significant predictors in both analyses, and three further variables (education level, respiratory disorders, therapy goal) were significant in one analysis. Conclusion: In adult outpatients receiving anthroposophic treatment for chronic diseases, symptom improvement after 6 and 12 months was predicted by baseline symptoms, health status, disease duration, education, and therapy goal. Other variables were not associated with the outcome. This secondary predictor analysis of data from a pre-post study does not allow for causal conclusions; the results are hypothesis generating and need verification in subsequent studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This study protocol adapts the traditional homeopathic drug proving methodology to a modern clinical trial design. Method: Multi-centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 1 trial with 30 healthy volunteers. The study consists of a seven day run-in period, a five day intervention period and a 16 day post-intervention observation period. Subjects, investigators and the statisticians are blinded from the allocation to the study arm and from the identity of the homeopathic drug. The intervention is a highly diluted homeopathic drug (potency C12 = 1024), Dose: 5 globules taken 5 times per day over a maximum period of 5 days. The placebo consists of an optically identical carrier substance (sucrose globules). Subjects document the symptoms they experience in a semi-structured online diary. The primary outcome parameter is the number of specific symptoms that characterise the intervention compared to the placebo after a period of three weeks. Secondary outcome parameters are qualitative differences in profiles of characteristic and proving symptoms and the total number of all proving symptoms. The number of symptoms will be quantitatively analysed on an intention-to-treat basis using ANCOVA with the subject's expectation and baseline values as covariates. Content analysis according to Mayring is adapted to suit the homeopathic qualitative analysis procedure. Discussion: Homeopathic drug proving trials using the terminology of clinical trials according GCP and fulfilling current requirements for research under the current drug regulations is feasible. However, within the current regulations, homeopathic drug proving trials are classified as phase 1 trials, although their aim is not to explore the safety and pharmacological dynamics of the drug, but rather to find clinical indications according to the theory of homeopathy. To avoid bias, it is necessary that neither the subjects nor the investigators know the identity of the drug. This requires a modification to the informed consent process and blinded study materials. Because it is impossible to distinguish between adverse events and proving symptoms, both must be documented together. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01061229. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: On the range of diagnoses, course of treatment, and long-term outcome in patients who chose to receive homeopathic medical treatment very little is known. We investigated homeopathic practice in an industrialized country under everyday conditions. Methods: In a prospective, multicentre cohort study with 103 primary care practices with additional specialisation in homeopathy in Germany and Switzerland, data from all patients (age >1 year) consulting the physician for the first time were observed. The main outcome measures were: Patient and physician assessments (numeric rating scales from 0 to 10) and quality of life at baseline, and after 3, 12, and 24 months. Results: A total of 3,981 patients were studied including 2,851 adults (29% men, mean age 42.5 ± 13.1 years; 71% women, 39.9 ± 12.4 years) and 1,130 children (52% boys, 6.5 ± 3.9 years; 48% girls, 7.0 ± 4.3 years). Ninety-seven percent of all diagnoses were chronic with an average duration of 8.8 ± 8 years. The most frequent diagnoses were allergic rhinitis in men, headache in women, and atopic dermatitis in children. Disease severity decreased significantly (p < 0.001) between baseline and 24 months (adults from 6.2 ± 1.7 to 3.0 ± 2.2; children from 6.1 ± 1.8 to 2.2 ± 1.9). Physicians' assessments yielded similar results. For adults and young children, major improvements were observed for quality of life, whereas no changes were seen in adolescents. Younger age and more severe disease at baseline were factors predictive of better therapeutic success. Conclusion: Disease severity and quality of life demonstrated marked and sustained improvements following homeopathic treatment period. Our findings indicate that homeopathic medical therapy may play a beneficial role in the long-term care of patients with chronic diseases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Chinese medicine modalities, including acupuncture and Chinese herbal medicine (CHM), have been used as palliative interventions among cancer patients. More research should be conducted to confirm their effectiveness.Objectives: The objective of this study was to prioritize Chinese medicine clinical research questions for cancer palliative care.Methods: Twelve international experts, including physicians, Chinese medicine practitioners, nurses, and clinical research methodologists (n = 3 from each category), from Asia, North America, Australia, and Europe participated in a two-round Delphi survey for prioritizing 29 research questions identified from existing systematic reviews. The experts were asked to 1) rate clinical importance of answering the questions on a nine-point Likert scale; 2) provide qualitative comments on their ratings; and 3) suggest outcome measurement approaches.Results: Eight research priorities reached positive consensus after the two-round Delphi survey. Six of the priorities focused on acupuncture and related therapies, of which median ratings on importance ranged from 7.0 to 8.0 (interquartile range: 1.00 to 2.50), and the percentage agreement ranged from 75.0% to 91.7%. The remaining two priorities related to CHM, with median ratings ranged from 7.0 to 8.0 (interquartile range: 1.00 to 1.50) and percentage agreement ranged from 75.0% to 83.3%. Neither positive nor negative consensus was established among the remaining 21 questions.Conclusion: The findings will inform rational allocation of scarce research funding for evaluating the effectiveness of Chinese medicine for cancer palliative care, especially on acupuncture and related therapies. Further research on herb safety and herb-drug interaction should be performed before conducting international trials on CHM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]