Increasing use of CAM therapies in the United States provides an opportunity to reexamine the ethical foundations of western medical practice with renewed attention to the commitment physicians make when entering into a caring relationship with a patient. Physicians routinely balance risks and benefits in decision making, but the advent of CAM therapies challenges physicians to deal responsibly with paradigms of healing that fall outside the boundaries of conventional medical practice and to make decisions in these unfamiliar realms, often in the absence of evidence. Specific details of each case should be factored into a riskbenefit assessment so that a plan of treatment that is clinically reasonable and ethically appropriate can be developed.
The commitment to joint problem solving over time that is a central obligation of the physicianpatient relationship becomes even more important when considering the use of CAM therapies. Elucidating patients' experiences of illness, their hopes and values, and what they see as their best interests is vital if physicians and patients are to find common ground when making decisions in areas of uncertainty. As the body of evidence regarding CAM therapies grows, we hope that the model of decision making we have presented will provide an ethical structure for medical practice in which physicians routinely combine the powerful tools of conventional medicine with those CAM therapies shown to be worthy of clinical integration.
Author and Article Information
From Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon; Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; and University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle, Washington.
Acknowledgments: The authors thank the two patients who allowed us to share their stories, Debbie Mosley for invaluable technical assistance, and Martin Donohoe for critical comments.
Grant Support: By unrestricted educational grants from the American Specialty Health Plans, San Diego, California; the Medtronic Foundation, Minneapolis, Minnesota; and the Friends of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts.
Requests for Single Reprints: Karen E. Adams, MD, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology UHNSO, Oregon Health and Science University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Road, Portland, OR 97239; e-mail, email@example.com.
Current Author Addresses: Dr. Adams: Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology UHNSO, Oregon Health and Science University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Road, Portland, OR 97239.
Mr. Cohen and Dr. Eisenberg: Center for Alternative Medicine Research and Education, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 330 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA, 02215
Dr. Jonsen: University of Washington (Emeritus), 1333 Jones Street, San Francisco, CA 94109.
1. Eisenberg DM, Davis RB, Ettner SL, Appel S, Wilkey S, Van Rompay M, et al. Trends in alternative medicine use in the United States, 1990-1997: results of a follow-up national survey. JAMA. 1998;280:1569-75. [PMID: 9820257] | PubMed |
2. Eisenberg DM. The Invisible Mainstream. Harvard Medical Alumni Bulletin. 1996;70:20-5.
3. Angell M, Kassirer JP. Alternative medicinethe risks of untested and unregulated remedies [Editorial] N Engl J Med. 1998;339:839-41. [PMID: 9738094] | PubMed |
4. Kottow MH. Classical medicine v alternative medical practices. J Med Ethics. 1992;18:18-22. [PMID: 1573644] | PubMed |
5. Kramer N. Why I would not recommend complementary or alternative therapies: a physician's perspective. Rheum Dis Clin North Am. 1999;25:833-43, vii. [PMID: 10573760] | PubMed |
6. Quill TE, Cassel CK. Nonabandonment: a central obligation for physicians. Ann Intern Med. 1995;122:368-74. [PMID: 7847649] | PubMed |
7. Quill TE. Partnerships in patient care: a contractual approach. Ann Intern Med. 1983;98:228-34. [PMID: 6824257] | PubMed |
8. Emanuel EJ, Emanuel LL. Four models of the physician-patient relationship. JAMA. 1992;267:2221-6. [PMID: 1556799] | PubMed |
9. Jonsen AR. Casuistry and clinical ethics. In: Jecker NS, Jonsen AR, Pearlman RA, eds. Bioethics: An Introduction to the History, Methods and Practice. New York: Jones and Bartlett; 1997:158-61.
10. Jonsen AR. Casuistry: an alternative or complement to principles? Kennedy Inst Ethics J. 1995;5:237-51. [PMID: 11645308] | PubMed |
11. Ornish D, Scherwitz LW, Doody RS, Kesten D, McLanahan SM, Brown SE, et al. Effects of stress management training and dietary changes in treating ischemic heart disease. JAMA. 1983;249:54-9. [PMID: 6336794] | PubMed |
12. Long L, Huntley A, Ernst E. Which complementary and alternative therapies benefit which conditions? A survey of the opinions of 223 professional organizations. Complement Ther Med. 2001;9:178-85. [PMID: 11926432]. | PubMed |
13. Jonsen AR, Siegler M, Winslade WJ. Clinical Ethics. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1992.
14. May WE. The Physician's Covenant: Images of the Healer in Medical Ethics. Philadelphia: Westminster Pr; 1983.
15. Ramsey P. The Patient as Person: Explorations in Medical Ethics. New Haven: Yale Univ Pr; 1970.
16. Integration of Behavioral and Relaxation Approaches into the Treatment of Chronic Pain and Insomnia. NIH Technology Assessment Statement, NIH Publication No. PB96113964. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health; 1995:1-34.
17. NIH Consensus Conference. Acupuncture. JAMA. 1998;280:1518-24. [PMID: 9809733] | PubMed |
18. Spiegel D, Bloom JR, Kraemer HC, Gottheil E. Effect of psychosocial treatment on survival of patients with metastatic breast cancer. Lancet. 1989;2:888-91. [PMID: 2571815] | PubMed |
19. Fugh-Berman A. Alternative Medicine: What Works. Baltimore: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 1997.
20. Jonas W, Levin J, eds. Essentials of Complementary and Alternative Medicine. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 1999.
21. Spencer J, Jacobs J, eds. Complementary/Alternative Medicine: An Evidence-Based Approach. New York: Mosby; 1999.
22. Cohen MH, Eisenberg DM. Potential physician malpractice liability associated with complementary and integrative medical therapies. Ann Intern Med. 2002;136:596-603. [PMID: 11955028] |
Annals Abstract | PubMed |
23. Cohen MH. Beyond Complementary Medicine: Legal and Ethical Perspectives on Health Care and Human Evolution. Ann Arbor, MI: Univ of Michigan Pr; 2000.
24. Ernst E. Second thoughts about safety of St John's wort. Lancet. 1999;354:2014-6. [PMID: 10636361] | PubMed |
25. Fugh-Berman A. Herb-drug interactions. Lancet. 2000;355:134-8. [PMID: 10675182] | PubMed |
26. Piscitelli SC, Burstein AH, Chaitt D, Alfaro RM, Falloon J. Indinavir concentrations and St John's wort [Letter]. Lancet. 2000;355:547-8. [PMID: 10683007] | PubMed |
27. Eisenberg DM. Advising patients who seek alternative medical therapies. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127:61-9. [PMID: 9214254] | PubMed |
28. Quill TE, Brody H. Physician recommendations and patient autonomy: finding a balance between physician power and patient choice. Ann Intern Med. 1996;125:763-9. [PMID: 8929011] | PubMed |
29. Eisenberg DM, Cohen MH, Hrbek A,Grayzel J, Cooper RA. Credentialing complementary and alternative providers. Ann Intern Med. [In press].
30. Studdert DM, Eisenberg DM, Miller FH, Curto DA, Kaptchuk TJ, Brennan TA. Medical malpractice implications of alternative medicine. JAMA. 1998;280:1610-5. [PMID: 9820265] | PubMed |
Copyright ©2002 American College of Physicians American Society of Internal Medicine