Abstract
Currently, there are increasing debates on the necessity of health instruments in Chinese medicine (CM) emerging in China. This study aims to reevaluate its status and values. Analyzing the causes, limits, advantages, and properties characters of health instruments in CM, it is found that weak fundamental research, incomplete self-awareness, and complicated social factors are the primary causes of debates. A comprehensive analysis showed health instruments in CM have health evaluation benefits to people from a dominant Chinese culture, meet the requirements of cultural background, and bring long-term value to Chinese instrument researches. However, its values and status should be treated differently depending on various subtypes. Although little theoretical and practical evidences proved that patients-reported health instruments in CM should be proposed independently, the doctors- and nurses-reported questionnaires are necessary. With this in mind, the study group proposes the 'Chinese cultural instruments (CCIs)' and 'health-related CCIs'. The latter one aims to evaluate the health status of people in a dominant Chinese culture. The CCIs theory represents Chinese instrument researches on a larger regional and higher level, and resolves the debates on instruments between CM and Western medicine in China. Health instruments in CM bring more scientific and social benefits for Chinese instrument researches. However, it does not include cultural demands, and lacks scientific significance. CCIs have all its virtues, and add solutions to the latter's theory bottleneck and scientific debates, thus bringing increased benefits to clinical assessment in complementary and alternative medicine researches.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Preamble to the Constitution of the World Health Organization as adopted by the International Health Conference, New York, 19–22 June, 1946; signed on 22 July 1946 by the representatives of 61 States (Official Records of the World Health Organization, No. 2, p. 100) and entered into force on 7 April 1948.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH). Guidance for industry patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims. (2009-12). Available at: http://www. fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryI nformation/Guidances/UCM193282.pdf
Chen KJ, Song J. Quality of life research in a period of convalescence. In: Yang WY, Wu BP, Chen SC, eds. Reviews on the new treatments for convalescence in Chinese medicine. Beijing: People's Medical Publishing House;1994:69–73.
Liu FB. Exploratory research on quality of life in patients with gastrointestinal disease. J Guangzhou Univ Tradit Chin Med (Chin) 1997;14:225–228.
Liu FB. Application and prospect of scale measurement and appraisal in the assessment in TCM therapeutic efficacy evaluation. Chin J Integr Tradit West Med (Chin) 2007;27:1129–1132.
Zhang JY, Zhou TC, Zhao FR, Qian CQ, Liu GP. Research and application of self-made scale (questionnaire) in traditional Chinese medicine. J Shanghai Univ Tradit Chin Med (Chin) 2013;27:102–105.
Chen JX. Key problems of diagnose information and syndrome questionnaire development in Chinese medicine. Chin J Basic Med Tradit Chin Med (Chin) 2011;14:1053–1054.
Acquadro C, Berzon R, Dubois D, Leidy NK, Marquis P, Revicki D, et al. Incorporating the patient's perspective into drug development and communication: an ad hoc task force report of the Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Harmonization Group meeting at the Food and Drug Administration, February 16, 2001. Value Health 2003;6:522–531.
Liu FB, Hou ZK, Yang YY, Zhang ZZ, Xie D, Xie N, et al. Literature review and analysis of the development of health outcomes assessment instruments in CM. J Integr Med 2013;11:80–89.
Liu FB, Hou ZK, Yang YY, Li PW, Li QW, Xie N, et al. Literature review and analysis of the application of health outcome assessment instruments in CM. J Integr Med 2013;11:157–167.
Hou ZK, Liu FB, Liang YY, Zhuang KH, Lin CH, Li LJ. On the necessity of developing quality of life instruments in traditional Chinese medicine. J Integr Med (Chin) 2011;9:468–482.
Calvert M, Blazeby J, Altman DG, Revicki DA, Moher D, Brundage MD, et al. Reporting of patient-reported outcomes in randomized trials: the CONSORT PRO extension. JAMA 2013;309:814–822.
Scientific Advisory Committee of the Medical Outcomes Trust. Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: attributes and review criteria. Qual Life Res 2002;11:193–205.
Zhang CL. Scientific demarcation and the survival and development of traditional Chinese medicine. Med Society (Chin) 2011;24:35–37.
WHOQOL Group. Study protocol for the World Health Organization project to develop a quality of life assessment instrument (WHOQOL). Qual Life Res 1993;2:153–159.
Rutten L, Stolper E. Complementary alternative medicine, plausibility and statistics. Eur J Intern Med 2015;26:e5.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 81303148 and 81373786) and Scientific Research Program of Administrative Bureau of Traditional Chinese Medicine of Guangdong Province, China (No. 20132177)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hou, Zk., Chang, X., Liu, Fb. et al. Controversies on the values for health instruments of Chinese medicine. Chin. J. Integr. Med. 23, 146–152 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11655-016-2494-1
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11655-016-2494-1