Ng Szetuen
Hong Kong Association of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Hong Kong 999077, China.
Zhongguo Zhen Jiu. 2017 Jan 12;37(1):3-8. doi: 10.13703/j.0255-2930.2017.01.001.
The purpose of this study is to explore the differences of definition and clinical roles as well as international standardization between acupuncture as therapy and as specialty, which can provide reference evidence for specialization and internationalization of acupuncture. Owing to the clinical efficacy and safety, the credibility and controversy both exist in acupuncture; moreover, there is a lack of fair definition and international precedent regarding acupuncture specialty. Therefore, it is particularly essential to objectively compare the differences of definitions and clinical roles as well as criteria of international standardization for acupuncture as therapy and as specialty. It is believed acupuncture standardization can draw lessons from the international medical standards, evidence-based medicine and acupuncture theory from the following three major projects:acupuncture safety and contraindications; acupuncture indications and treatment guidelines; acupuncture indication classified into 3 levels of evidence-based acupuncture disease spectrum, as objective evidence of indication of acupuncture specialty.
本研究旨在探讨针灸作为一种疗法与作为一门专业在定义、临床作用以及国际标准化方面的差异,为针灸的专业化和国际化提供参考依据。由于针灸的临床疗效和安全性,其可信度和争议并存;此外,针灸专业缺乏公正的定义和国际先例。因此,客观比较针灸作为疗法和作为专业在定义、临床作用以及国际标准化标准方面的差异尤为重要。相信针灸标准化可借鉴国际医学标准、循证医学以及以下三个重大项目的针灸理论:针灸安全与禁忌;针灸适应证与治疗指南;将针灸适应证分类为循证针灸疾病谱的三个证据级别,作为针灸专业适应证的客观证据。