首页> 外文期刊>Health policy >The paradox of non-evidence based, publicly funded complementary alternative medicine in the English National Health Service: An explanation
【24h】

The paradox of non-evidence based, publicly funded complementary alternative medicine in the English National Health Service: An explanation

机译:英格兰国家卫生局基于非证据的,公共资助的补充替代药物的悖论:一种解释

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Despite the unproven effectiveness of many practices that are under the umbrella term 'complementary alternative medicine' (CAM), there is provision of CAM within the English National Health Service (NHS). Moreover, although the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence was established to promote scientifically validated medicine in the NHS, the paradox of publicly funded, non-evidence based CAM can be explained as linked with government policy of patient choice and specifically patient treatment choice. Patient choice is useful in the political and policy discourse as it is open to different interpretations and can be justified by policy-makers who rely on the traditional NHS values of equity and universality. Treatment choice finds expression in the policy of personalised healthcare linked with patient responsibilisation which finds resonance in the emphasis CAM places on self-care and self-management. More importantly, however, policy-makers also use patient choice and treatment choice as a policy initiative with the objective of encouraging destabilisation of the entrenched healthcare institutions and practices considered resistant to change. This political strategy of system reform has the unintended, paradoxical consequence of allowing for the emergence of non-evidence based, publicly funded CAM in the NHS. The political and policy discourse of patient choice thus trumps evidence based medicine, with patients that demand access to CAM becoming the unwitting beneficiaries. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
机译:尽管在“补充性替代药物”(CAM)的统称下,许多实践的有效性尚未得到证实,但英国国家卫生局(NHS)仍提供了CAM。此外,尽管成立了美国国家卫生保健卓越研究所以在NHS中推广经过科学验证的医学,但可以将政府资助的基于非证据的CAM悖论与政府的患者选择政策(特别是患者治疗选择)联系起来。病人的选择在政治和政策讨论中很有用,因为它可以接受不同的解释,并且决策者可以依靠传统的NHS公平和普遍性价值观来证明病人的选择。治疗选择在个性化医疗保健政策中与患者责任感联系在一起,这在CAM对自我护理和自我管理的重视中引起共鸣。但是,更重要的是,决策者还将患者选择和治疗选择作为一项政策倡议,目的是鼓励根深蒂固的医疗机构和被认为无法应对变化的做法造成不稳定。这种制度改革的政治策略具有意想不到的,自相矛盾的结果,即允许在NHS中出现基于非证据的,公共资助的CAM。因此,患者选择的政治和政策讨论胜过了循证医学,要求使用CAM的患者成为不知情的受益者。 (C)2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd.保留所有权利。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号