Cargando…

Evaluating complementary and alternative medicine interventions: in search of appropriate patient-centered outcome measures

BACKGROUND: Central to the development of a sound evidence base for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) interventions is the need for valid, reliable and relevant outcome measures to assess whether the interventions work. We assessed the specific needs for a database that would cover a wide...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Verhoef, Marja J, Vanderheyden, Laura C, Dryden, Trish, Mallory, Devon, Ware, Mark A
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2006
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1661594/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17118197
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6882-6-38
_version_ 1782131046288982016
author Verhoef, Marja J
Vanderheyden, Laura C
Dryden, Trish
Mallory, Devon
Ware, Mark A
author_facet Verhoef, Marja J
Vanderheyden, Laura C
Dryden, Trish
Mallory, Devon
Ware, Mark A
author_sort Verhoef, Marja J
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Central to the development of a sound evidence base for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) interventions is the need for valid, reliable and relevant outcome measures to assess whether the interventions work. We assessed the specific needs for a database that would cover a wide range of outcomes measures for CAM research and considered a framework for such a database. METHODS: The study was a survey of CAM researchers, practitioners and students. An online questionnaire was emailed to the members of the Canadian Interdisciplinary Network for CAM Research (IN-CAM) and the CAM Education and Research Network of Alberta (CAMera). The majority of survey questions were open-ended and asked about outcome measures currently used, outcome measures' assessment criteria, sources of information, perceived barriers to finding outcome measures and outcome domains of importance. Descriptive quantitative analysis and qualitative content analysis were used. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-four completed surveys were received. Of these, 62 respondents reported using outcome measures in their CAM research and identified 92 different specific outcomes. The most important barriers were the fact that, for many health concepts, outcome measures do not yet exist, as well as issues related to accessibility of instruments. Important outcome domains identified included physical, psychological, social, spiritual, quality of life and holistic measures. Participants also mentioned the importance of individualized measures that assess unique patient-centered outcomes for each research participant, and measures to assess the context of healing and the process of healing. CONCLUSION: We have developed a preliminary framework that includes all components of health-related outcomes. The framework provides a foundation for a larger, comprehensive collection of CAM outcomes. It fits very well in a whole systems perspective, which requires an expanded set of outcome measures, such as individualized and holistic measures, with attention to issues of process and context.
format Text
id pubmed-1661594
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2006
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-16615942006-11-25 Evaluating complementary and alternative medicine interventions: in search of appropriate patient-centered outcome measures Verhoef, Marja J Vanderheyden, Laura C Dryden, Trish Mallory, Devon Ware, Mark A BMC Complement Altern Med Research Article BACKGROUND: Central to the development of a sound evidence base for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) interventions is the need for valid, reliable and relevant outcome measures to assess whether the interventions work. We assessed the specific needs for a database that would cover a wide range of outcomes measures for CAM research and considered a framework for such a database. METHODS: The study was a survey of CAM researchers, practitioners and students. An online questionnaire was emailed to the members of the Canadian Interdisciplinary Network for CAM Research (IN-CAM) and the CAM Education and Research Network of Alberta (CAMera). The majority of survey questions were open-ended and asked about outcome measures currently used, outcome measures' assessment criteria, sources of information, perceived barriers to finding outcome measures and outcome domains of importance. Descriptive quantitative analysis and qualitative content analysis were used. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-four completed surveys were received. Of these, 62 respondents reported using outcome measures in their CAM research and identified 92 different specific outcomes. The most important barriers were the fact that, for many health concepts, outcome measures do not yet exist, as well as issues related to accessibility of instruments. Important outcome domains identified included physical, psychological, social, spiritual, quality of life and holistic measures. Participants also mentioned the importance of individualized measures that assess unique patient-centered outcomes for each research participant, and measures to assess the context of healing and the process of healing. CONCLUSION: We have developed a preliminary framework that includes all components of health-related outcomes. The framework provides a foundation for a larger, comprehensive collection of CAM outcomes. It fits very well in a whole systems perspective, which requires an expanded set of outcome measures, such as individualized and holistic measures, with attention to issues of process and context. BioMed Central 2006-11-21 /pmc/articles/PMC1661594/ /pubmed/17118197 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6882-6-38 Text en Copyright © 2006 Verhoef et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Verhoef, Marja J
Vanderheyden, Laura C
Dryden, Trish
Mallory, Devon
Ware, Mark A
Evaluating complementary and alternative medicine interventions: in search of appropriate patient-centered outcome measures
title Evaluating complementary and alternative medicine interventions: in search of appropriate patient-centered outcome measures
title_full Evaluating complementary and alternative medicine interventions: in search of appropriate patient-centered outcome measures
title_fullStr Evaluating complementary and alternative medicine interventions: in search of appropriate patient-centered outcome measures
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating complementary and alternative medicine interventions: in search of appropriate patient-centered outcome measures
title_short Evaluating complementary and alternative medicine interventions: in search of appropriate patient-centered outcome measures
title_sort evaluating complementary and alternative medicine interventions: in search of appropriate patient-centered outcome measures
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1661594/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17118197
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6882-6-38
work_keys_str_mv AT verhoefmarjaj evaluatingcomplementaryandalternativemedicineinterventionsinsearchofappropriatepatientcenteredoutcomemeasures
AT vanderheydenlaurac evaluatingcomplementaryandalternativemedicineinterventionsinsearchofappropriatepatientcenteredoutcomemeasures
AT drydentrish evaluatingcomplementaryandalternativemedicineinterventionsinsearchofappropriatepatientcenteredoutcomemeasures
AT mallorydevon evaluatingcomplementaryandalternativemedicineinterventionsinsearchofappropriatepatientcenteredoutcomemeasures
AT waremarka evaluatingcomplementaryandalternativemedicineinterventionsinsearchofappropriatepatientcenteredoutcomemeasures