Marc
28-01-2006, 10:06 AM
pratique de santé du samedi 12 Novembre 2005 N°39
Ardent defenseur des medecines complementaires et alternatives, le prince Charles a demandé à un groupe de chercheurs indépendants d'en mesurer le rapport cout-benefices. Rendues au mois d'octobre, les conclusions des experts affirment que cinq therapies alternatives jugées aussi, sinon plus, efficaces que les traitements classiques- pourraient s'averer bénéfiques à l'economie du pays. Il s'agit de l'acupuncture, ds le traitement de l'arthrite, du mal de dos et des douleurs post chirurgicales; de l'homéopathie contre l'asthme; et de la phytotherapie pour soigner la dépression, les troubles de la circulation, ou la grippe; de l'osteopathie et de la chiropractie employées contre les lombalgies. Ces conclusions pourraient se reveler utiles sur le plan politique, en suscitant des investissements plus importants dans la recherche sur les medecines complementaires et alternatives.
Article du GOsC
Thursday, 13 October 2005
Complementary therapies should be given a greater role in the NHS, according to a new report commissioned by The Prince of Wales. Results of a n independent investigation into the potential contribution to UK healthcare of the ‘Big Five'* complementary therapies – Osteopathy, Chiropractic, Acupuncture, Homeopathy and Herbal Medicine – were published on Thursday, 6 October and generated considerable media commentary.
The nine-month enquiry, led by Christopher Smallwood former chief economic advisor to Barclays Plc, investigated the evidence relating to effectiveness and associated costs of provision.
Osteopathy and chiropractic (considered together as “manipulation therapies”), along with acupuncture, are identified as three services where Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) could play a larger role and help to fill recognised gaps in national healthcare provision – especially in the treatment of chronic conditions, including back pain, anxiety, stress and depression. The report concedes that wider use may not necessarily result in significant direct cost savings for the NHS, but would benefit the wider economy. Back pain alone accounts for 200 million days lost from work each year at an estimated cost of £11 billion in lost production.
The report also recognises that many people in less well-off areas do not have access to these services, citing the shortage of treatments such as osteopathy and acupuncture in poorer areas: “Complementary medicine remains out of the reach for many low income families, those who would have found most benefit from its provision.”
The key conclusions of the report are:
“Many of the most effective CAM therapies correspond to recognised ‘effectiveness gaps' in NHS treatment, which suggests that they may have the potential to make an important contribution to the delivery of healthcare in the UK. The main areas identified comprise chronic and complex conditions, anxiety, stress and depression, and palliative care relating particularly to pain and nausea.”
“Despite the fragmentary nature of the evidence, there seems good reason to believe that a number of CAM treatments offer the possibility of significant savings in direct health costs … [or] deliver additional benefits to patients in a cost-effective way. “
“Our principal recommendation therefore is that Health Ministers should invite the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) to carry out a full assessment of the cost-effectiveness of the therapies which we have identified and their potential role within the NHS, in particular with a view to the closing of ‘effectiveness gaps.”
“Since the psychosocial and chronic ailments where CAM seems able to make its best contribution are particularly prevalent in the deprived communities where people lack the means to pay for such care … [there] will be a strong case for giving priority to extending the availability of CAM in these areas. “
“[There] are substantial regional differences in the provision of CAM … [these] disparities will also need to be addressed.”
* As defined by the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee: 6 th Report. Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 2000.
Faute de preuves scientifiques, l'économie relance l'intérêt pour nos techniques :o
Votre avis ?
Ardent defenseur des medecines complementaires et alternatives, le prince Charles a demandé à un groupe de chercheurs indépendants d'en mesurer le rapport cout-benefices. Rendues au mois d'octobre, les conclusions des experts affirment que cinq therapies alternatives jugées aussi, sinon plus, efficaces que les traitements classiques- pourraient s'averer bénéfiques à l'economie du pays. Il s'agit de l'acupuncture, ds le traitement de l'arthrite, du mal de dos et des douleurs post chirurgicales; de l'homéopathie contre l'asthme; et de la phytotherapie pour soigner la dépression, les troubles de la circulation, ou la grippe; de l'osteopathie et de la chiropractie employées contre les lombalgies. Ces conclusions pourraient se reveler utiles sur le plan politique, en suscitant des investissements plus importants dans la recherche sur les medecines complementaires et alternatives.
Article du GOsC
Thursday, 13 October 2005
Complementary therapies should be given a greater role in the NHS, according to a new report commissioned by The Prince of Wales. Results of a n independent investigation into the potential contribution to UK healthcare of the ‘Big Five'* complementary therapies – Osteopathy, Chiropractic, Acupuncture, Homeopathy and Herbal Medicine – were published on Thursday, 6 October and generated considerable media commentary.
The nine-month enquiry, led by Christopher Smallwood former chief economic advisor to Barclays Plc, investigated the evidence relating to effectiveness and associated costs of provision.
Osteopathy and chiropractic (considered together as “manipulation therapies”), along with acupuncture, are identified as three services where Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) could play a larger role and help to fill recognised gaps in national healthcare provision – especially in the treatment of chronic conditions, including back pain, anxiety, stress and depression. The report concedes that wider use may not necessarily result in significant direct cost savings for the NHS, but would benefit the wider economy. Back pain alone accounts for 200 million days lost from work each year at an estimated cost of £11 billion in lost production.
The report also recognises that many people in less well-off areas do not have access to these services, citing the shortage of treatments such as osteopathy and acupuncture in poorer areas: “Complementary medicine remains out of the reach for many low income families, those who would have found most benefit from its provision.”
The key conclusions of the report are:
“Many of the most effective CAM therapies correspond to recognised ‘effectiveness gaps' in NHS treatment, which suggests that they may have the potential to make an important contribution to the delivery of healthcare in the UK. The main areas identified comprise chronic and complex conditions, anxiety, stress and depression, and palliative care relating particularly to pain and nausea.”
“Despite the fragmentary nature of the evidence, there seems good reason to believe that a number of CAM treatments offer the possibility of significant savings in direct health costs … [or] deliver additional benefits to patients in a cost-effective way. “
“Our principal recommendation therefore is that Health Ministers should invite the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) to carry out a full assessment of the cost-effectiveness of the therapies which we have identified and their potential role within the NHS, in particular with a view to the closing of ‘effectiveness gaps.”
“Since the psychosocial and chronic ailments where CAM seems able to make its best contribution are particularly prevalent in the deprived communities where people lack the means to pay for such care … [there] will be a strong case for giving priority to extending the availability of CAM in these areas. “
“[There] are substantial regional differences in the provision of CAM … [these] disparities will also need to be addressed.”
* As defined by the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee: 6 th Report. Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 2000.
Faute de preuves scientifiques, l'économie relance l'intérêt pour nos techniques :o
Votre avis ?