TY - JOUR
T1 - Implementation of evidence-based practice
T2 - A naturopath perspective
AU - Ooi, Soo Liang
AU - Rae, John
AU - Pak, Sokcheon
N1 - Imported on 12 Apr 2017 - DigiTool details were: Journal title (773t) = Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice. ISSNs: 1744-3881;
PY - 2016
Y1 - 2016
N2 - Evidence-based practice (EBP), an approach to clinical practice that places emphasis on the use of best available research evidence for decision-making, has been adopted broadly in clinical practice. As a patient-focused approach, EBP promotes the spirit of inquiry. It can also facilitate consistency of care across professional boundaries, and clarify the directions of research. However, over-emphasis on systematic reviews and randomised control trials as the “gold standard” for evidence is a major limitation of EBP as it is being practised today. There are also objections to EBP based on epistemological grounds. Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) therapies often fare unfavourably under the scrutiny of EBP due to the lack of research and inherent differences in healing ideology. Naturopathy is a unique form of CAM, based on both traditional and scientific knowledge. We argue that there is no conflict between naturopathy and EBP. EBP can be adopted as a useful approach to assimilate scientific evidence in naturopathic practices. However, naturopaths need to reconcile tensions between traditional and scientific knowledge in their choice of treatment remedies, while adhering to the naturopathic principles of healing, to benefit the patients. They must also maintain their emphasis on clinical expertise, and also patient preferences and values, in clinical decision-making.
AB - Evidence-based practice (EBP), an approach to clinical practice that places emphasis on the use of best available research evidence for decision-making, has been adopted broadly in clinical practice. As a patient-focused approach, EBP promotes the spirit of inquiry. It can also facilitate consistency of care across professional boundaries, and clarify the directions of research. However, over-emphasis on systematic reviews and randomised control trials as the “gold standard” for evidence is a major limitation of EBP as it is being practised today. There are also objections to EBP based on epistemological grounds. Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) therapies often fare unfavourably under the scrutiny of EBP due to the lack of research and inherent differences in healing ideology. Naturopathy is a unique form of CAM, based on both traditional and scientific knowledge. We argue that there is no conflict between naturopathy and EBP. EBP can be adopted as a useful approach to assimilate scientific evidence in naturopathic practices. However, naturopaths need to reconcile tensions between traditional and scientific knowledge in their choice of treatment remedies, while adhering to the naturopathic principles of healing, to benefit the patients. They must also maintain their emphasis on clinical expertise, and also patient preferences and values, in clinical decision-making.
KW - Evidence-based practice
KW - Research
KW - Review
KW - Naturopathy
U2 - 10.1016/j.ctcp.2015.11.004
DO - 10.1016/j.ctcp.2015.11.004
M3 - Review article
C2 - 26850801
SN - 1744-3881
VL - 22
SP - 24
EP - 28
JO - Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice
JF - Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice
ER -