London South Bank University, 103 Borough Road, London, SE1 0AA, UK.
J Ethnopharmacol. 2012 Apr 10;140(3):604-13. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2012.01.052. Epub 2012 Feb 7.
Acupuncture practice is based on the theoretical, historical and philosophical principles, which are part of Chinese medicine. Traditional acupuncture practitioners assess their patients' conditions using Chinese medicine diagnostic techniques, which determine clinical care and treatment. Little is known about differences in the perceptions of research evidence among practitioners in the European Union (EU) and China, given the diversity of acupuncture practice.
This study explored differences between practitioners of traditional acupuncture regarding perceived need for research evidence and prioritisation for future clinical trials, based on their practice within the EU and China. A convenience sample of acupuncturists in the EU (contacted by their professional organisation) and China (from geographically dispersed hospitals) were invited to participate in a survey, which was conducted during 2010/2011. Data collected included: practitioners' demographic details, country of training, practice setting, acupuncture techniques, perceived adverse event reporting, diagnostic methods, conditions commonly treated, conditions perceived as needing more evidence and practitioner perceptions of conditions which could demonstrate benefit if investigated in clinical trials.
From 1126 survey responses, 1020 (559 EU, 461 China) could be included in the analysis for direct comparison. A response rate for the EU could not be calculated but for China was 98%. Pain was the most frequently reported commonly treated condition by EU acupuncturists and neurological conditions (mainly stroke) for Chinese practitioners. The top reported priorities for research were obstetrics/gynaecological conditions in the EU and neurological problems in China.
The survey identified differences in practice and training between acupuncturists in China and the EU and between EU member states. These differences may inform prioritisation of health conditions for future trials. Innovative research methods are recommended to incorporate the complexity and plurality of acupuncture practice and theory. Creation of collaborative networks is crucial in overcoming these differences to facilitate international, multi-centre clinical trials.
针灸实践基于理论、历史和哲学原理，这些原理是中医的一部分。传统针灸师使用中医诊断技术评估患者的病情，这决定了临床护理和治疗。鉴于针灸实践的多样性，对于欧盟（EU）和中国的从业者对研究证据的看法存在差异，我们知之甚少。
本研究基于欧盟和中国的实践，探讨了传统针灸师对研究证据的需求以及未来临床试验的优先次序的看法。通过他们的专业组织联系欧盟的针灸师（通过他们的专业组织联系）和中国（来自地理上分散的医院）的方便样本被邀请参加一项调查，该调查于 2010/2011 年进行。收集的数据包括：从业者的人口统计细节、培训国家、实践环境、针灸技术、感知不良事件报告、诊断方法、常见治疗的疾病、认为需要更多证据的疾病以及从业者对可能在临床试验中受益的疾病的看法。
从 1126 份调查回复中，有 1020 份（559 份欧盟，461 份中国）可直接比较进行分析。欧盟的回复率无法计算，但中国的回复率为 98%。疼痛是欧盟针灸师报告的最常见的常见治疗疾病，而中国针灸师报告的神经系统疾病（主要是中风）。欧盟的研究优先事项是妇产科疾病，中国的研究优先事项是神经系统问题。
该调查确定了中国和欧盟以及欧盟成员国之间针灸师之间的实践和培训差异。这些差异可能为未来试验的健康状况确定优先次序。建议使用创新的研究方法来整合针灸实践和理论的复杂性和多样性。创建合作网络对于克服这些差异以促进国际、多中心临床试验至关重要。
