Integration of complementary and alternative medicine into German medical school curricula -- contradictions between the opinions of decision makers and the status quo.

Benno Brinkhaus, Stefanie Joos, Martin Lindner, Ralf Kohnen, Claudia Witt, Stefan N Willich, Eckhart G Hahn
{"title":"Integration of complementary and alternative medicine into German medical school curricula -- contradictions between the opinions of decision makers and the status quo.","authors":"Benno Brinkhaus,&nbsp;Stefanie Joos,&nbsp;Martin Lindner,&nbsp;Ralf Kohnen,&nbsp;Claudia Witt,&nbsp;Stefan N Willich,&nbsp;Eckhart G Hahn","doi":"10.1159/000085227","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>There is a growing demand for complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in Western societies. This trend has lead to the gradual integration of CAM courses into medical school curricula. The aim of this study was to survey key decision makers at German medical schools with regard to their views on CAM and to examine the extent to which CAM has already been integrated in the German medical school system.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A questionnaire was sent to 753 clinic and institute directors at German medical schools.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 500 questionnaires (66%) were returned. 39% of respondents had a positive opinion of CAM, 27% had a neutral opinion and 31% had a negative opinion. 3% of respondents were unsure. The CAM therapies viewed most positively were osteopathy (52%), acupuncture (48%), and naturopathy (41%). Most respondents were in favor of integrating CAM into the medical system. However, a larger percentage favored its use in research (61%) and teaching (59%) rather than in the treatment of patients (58%). Only 191 respondents (38%) indicated that CAM treatment methods had been integrated into the curriculum of their respective medical schools. In these schools, CAM was mainly used in patient treatment (35%), followed by research (22%) and education (21%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our data show that the majority of respondents were in favor of integrating CAM into medical school curricula. However, at the time of our survey, only a small percentage of medical schools had actually put this into practice. The reasons for this discrepancy are unclear and should be further investigated.</p>","PeriodicalId":80278,"journal":{"name":"Forschende Komplementarmedizin und klassische Naturheilkunde = Research in complementary and natural classical medicine","volume":"12 3","pages":"139-43"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000085227","citationCount":"29","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forschende Komplementarmedizin und klassische Naturheilkunde = Research in complementary and natural classical medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000085227","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2005/6/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 29

Abstract

Introduction: There is a growing demand for complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in Western societies. This trend has lead to the gradual integration of CAM courses into medical school curricula. The aim of this study was to survey key decision makers at German medical schools with regard to their views on CAM and to examine the extent to which CAM has already been integrated in the German medical school system.

Materials and methods: A questionnaire was sent to 753 clinic and institute directors at German medical schools.

Results: A total of 500 questionnaires (66%) were returned. 39% of respondents had a positive opinion of CAM, 27% had a neutral opinion and 31% had a negative opinion. 3% of respondents were unsure. The CAM therapies viewed most positively were osteopathy (52%), acupuncture (48%), and naturopathy (41%). Most respondents were in favor of integrating CAM into the medical system. However, a larger percentage favored its use in research (61%) and teaching (59%) rather than in the treatment of patients (58%). Only 191 respondents (38%) indicated that CAM treatment methods had been integrated into the curriculum of their respective medical schools. In these schools, CAM was mainly used in patient treatment (35%), followed by research (22%) and education (21%).

Conclusions: Our data show that the majority of respondents were in favor of integrating CAM into medical school curricula. However, at the time of our survey, only a small percentage of medical schools had actually put this into practice. The reasons for this discrepancy are unclear and should be further investigated.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
将补充和替代医学纳入德国医学院课程——决策者的意见与现状之间的矛盾。
在西方社会,对补充和替代医学(CAM)的需求日益增长。这一趋势导致CAM课程逐渐融入医学院课程。这项研究的目的是调查德国医学院的主要决策者对CAM的看法,并检查CAM已经融入德国医学院系统的程度。材料和方法:向德国医学院753名诊所和研究所主任发送问卷。结果:共回收问卷500份(66%)。39%的受访者对CAM持肯定态度,27%的人持中立态度,31%的人持否定态度。3%的受访者表示不确定。最积极的CAM疗法是整骨疗法(52%)、针灸疗法(48%)和自然疗法(41%)。大多数受访者赞成将辅助医学纳入医疗系统。然而,更大比例的人倾向于将其用于研究(61%)和教学(59%),而不是用于治疗患者(58%)。只有191个答复国(38%)表示,辅助医学治疗方法已纳入各自医学院的课程。在这些学校中,CAM主要用于患者治疗(35%),其次是研究(22%)和教育(21%)。结论:我们的数据显示,大多数受访者赞成将CAM纳入医学院课程。然而,在我们进行调查时,只有一小部分医学院真正实施了这一做法。造成这种差异的原因尚不清楚,应进一步调查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Open trial to assess aspects of safety and efficacy of a combined herbal cough syrup with ivy and thyme. [Reduction of endogenous regulation in internal medicine patients]. [Intravenous oxygen therapy increases the activity of the antioxidative and antiatherogenic serum enzyme paraoxonase 1]. Patients' expectations about the benefit of antibiotic treatment: lessons from a randomised controlled trial. Biomedical evidence of influence of geopathic zones on the human body: scientifically traceable effects and ways of harmonization.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1