Focus on Alternative and Complementary Therapies
www.pharmpress.com/fact
Focus Alternat Complement Ther©2005 Pharmaceutical Press
Focus Altern Complement Ther 2004; 9: 46–7
The aim of this study was to describe the use of and attitudes to acupuncture and homoeopathy among doctors in a research position compared to clinicians in hospital and general practice.
Two separate questionnaires on attitudes towards acupuncture and homoeopathy were mailed to two independent random samples of members of the Norwegian Medical Association. The response rates were 77% (acupuncture) and 71% (homoeopathy).
A total of 15.1% of doctors in a research position have been treated with homoeopathy, compared to 5.0% of hospital doctors and 9.7% of GPs (P < 0.001). The difference in proportion reporting effect of the therapy was not statistically significant. A total of 7.7% of doctors in a research position have been treated with acupuncture, compared to 7.2% of hospital doctors and 8.3% of GPs (P = 1.00). The difference in proportion reporting effect of the therapy was not statistically significant. Thirty-five per cent of doctors in a research position found more than 50% of the effect of acupuncture to be placebo (P < 0.001 when compared to the other groups). For homoeopathy the proportion with the same opinion is around 60% for all groups (P = 0.056). There is a statistically significant difference between groups in the view of both homoeopathy’s and acupuncture’s place in the health system (P ≤ 0.001).
This study shows that doctors in a research position are the most sceptical of integrating these therapies into the public healthcare system. Doctors working in research are even more negative to acupuncture and homoeopathy than their hospital and general practice colleagues, although they themselves have tried homoeopathy more.
