PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 16603990

Developing a complementary therapy policy.

Julia Fearon
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Increasingly, healthcare professionals from a variety of settings are looking to integrate complementary therapies into mainstream healthcare. Robust policy development is a prerequisite for effective integration and the building of sustainable services. Unfortunately many of those wanting to drive forward the complementary therapy agenda have little knowledge of policy development. For those individuals planning to integrate complementary therapies into care, this article will address some of the issues around developing a complementary therapy policy: the need for a robust policy, how to begin developing a policy and suggested inclusions for such a policy.

Explore related subjects

Advisory CommitteesComplementary TherapiesEvidence-Based MedicineHealth PolicyHealth Services Needs and DemandHumansLicensureOrganizational PolicyReferral and ConsultationRegistriesState MedicineUnited KingdomWritingJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Julia Fearon. Developing a complementary therapy policy.. https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2006.15.4.20549

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2022

The International Consensus Classification of Mature Lymphoid Neoplasms: a report from the Clinical Advisory Committee.

Since the publication of the Revised European-American Classification of Lymphoid Neoplasms in 1994, subsequent updates of the classification of lymphoid neoplasms have been generated through iterative international efforts to achieve broad consensus among hematopathologists, geneticists, molecular scientists, and clinicians. Significant progress has recently been made in the characterization of malignancies of the immune system, with many new insights provided by genomic studies. They have led to this proposal. We have followed the same process that was successfully used for the third and fourth editions of the World Health Organization Classification of Hematologic Neoplasms. The definition, recommended studies, and criteria for the diagnosis of many entities have been extensively refined. Some categories considered provisional have now been upgraded to definite entities. Terminology for some diseases has been revised to adapt nomenclature to the current knowledge of their biology, but these modifications have been restricted to well-justified situations. Major findings from recent genomic studies have impacted the conceptual framework and diagnostic criteria for many disease entities. These changes will have an impact on optimal clinical management. The conclusions of this work are summarized in this report as the proposed International Consensus Classification of mature lymphoid, histiocytic, and dendritic cell tumors.

Advisory Committees↗
PubMed2007

European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR): consensus statement on CT colonography.

Rapid clinical dissemination of CT colonography (CTC) is occurring in parallel with continued research into technique optimisation and diagnostic performance. A need exists therefore for current guidance as to basic prerequisites for effective clinical implementation. A questionnaire detailing CTC technique, analysis, training and clinical implementation was developed by the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) CTC committee and circulated to all faculty members of previous ESGAR "hands-on" CTC training courses. Responses were collated and a consensus statement produced. Of 27 invited to participate, 24 responded. Reasonable consensus was reached on bowel preparation, colonic distension, patient positioning, use of IV contrast and optimal scan parameters. Both primary 2D and primary 3D analysis were advocated equally, with some evidence that more experienced readers prefer primary 2D. Training was universally recommended, although there was no consensus regarding minimum requirements. CTC was thought superior to barium enema, although recommended for screening only in the presence of validated local experience. There was consensus that polyps 4 mm or less could be ignored assuming agreement from local gastroenterological colleagues. There is increasing consensus amongst European experts as to the current best practice in CTC.

Advisory Committees↗