Evidence-Based Integrative Medicine

, Volume 2, Issue 3, pp 117–122 | Cite as

Challenges and Future Directions for Integrative Medicine in Clinical Practice

‘Integrative’, ‘Complementary’ and ‘Alternative’ Medicine
  • Marc Cohen
Current Opinion


The best medical practice involves the integration of the therapies taken from the full range of available healthcare options, applied after considering the circumstances of each individual patient. This requires a knowledge of both conventional and non-conventional therapies along with a consideration of the personal preferences of both the practitioner and the patient in the context of informed consent, the strength of the available scientific evidence, the range of possible alternatives, the associated costs and risks versus the potential benefits of treatment, as well as the availability, accessibility and immediacy of treatment.

Effective integration is often difficult to achieve as there are many obstacles to the implementation of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in mainstream practice. These include the credentialing and regulation of complementary therapists, the development of appropriate funding models for supporting the delivery of CAM services within the mainstream health system, along with obstacles around the production, dissemination and use of evidence about CAM, as the hurdles for producing and evaluating evidence are often placed considerably higher for CAM than for conventional medicine. A further obstacle to integration relates to interdisciplinary collaboration that is hampered by differences in philosophy and nomenclature between disciplines, few interdisciplinary associations or forums where interdisciplinary issues can be discussed, along with competition for clients and unequal status and access to public funding.

Despite these obstacles, progress is being made. The research base for CAM is continually expanding, there is a growing recognition of the need for cross-training of conventional and complementary practitioners, and complementary therapies such as yoga, massage, meditation and hypnosis appear to be widely accepted in mainstream general practice. However, this acceptance may be based on the perception that these therapies are relatively safe and do not threaten to usurp the role of the general practitioner rather than scientific evidence of their efficacy and safety.

Collaboration requires an environment of shared understanding, mutual respect and trust. The fostering of interdisciplinary collaboration therefore requires open communication between patients, conventional medical practitioners and complementary therapists along with appropriate education and training programmes. As the practice of medicine is also intricately linked with the socio-political and cultural environment, the successful implementation of integrative medicine will also require a cultural shift across the public and private sector that creates an imperative for all health professionals to work together for the benefit of their patients and the wider community.


Complementary Medicine Conventional Medicine Integrative Medicine Complementary Therapy Complementary Therapist 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



No sources of funding were used to assist in the preparation of this review. Professor Cohen is currently President of the Australian Integrative Medicine Association.


  1. 1.
    Cohen M. What is complementary medicine? Aust Fam Physician 2000; 29(12): 1125–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zollman C, Vickers A. ABC of complementary medicine: what is complementary medicine? BMJ 1999; 319: 693–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lloyd P, Lupton D, Wiesner D, et al. Choosing alternative therapy: an exploratory study of sociodemographic characteristics and motives of patients resident in Sydney. Aust J Public Health 1993; 17: 135–44PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fisher P, Ward A. Complementary medicine in Europe. BMJ 1994; 309: 107–11PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Eisenberg D, Davis R, Ettner S, et al. Trends in alternative medicine use in the United States 1990–1997: results of a follow-up national survey. JAMA 1998; 280: 1569–75PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    MacLennan AH, Wilson DH, Taylor AW. The escalating cost and prevalence of alternative medicine. Prev Med 2002 Aug; 35(2): 166–73PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    MacLennan AH, Myers SP, Taylor AW. The continuing use of complementary and alternative medicine in South Australia: costs and beliefs in 2004. Med J Aust 2006; 184(1): 27–31PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Australian Medical Association. Complementary medicine position statement, 2002 [online]. Available from URL: [Accessed 2006 Jan 4]
  9. 9.
    Cohen M, Penman S, Pirotta M, et al. The integration of complementary therapies in Australian General Practice: results of a national survey. J Altern Comple ment Med 2005 Dec; 11(6): 995–1004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pirotta M, Cohen M, Kotsirilos V, et al. Complementary therapies: have they become accepted in general practice? Med J Aust 2000; 172(3): 105–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cohen M. The challenges of holistic and integrative medicine in practice. In: Cohen M, editor. Holistic solutions for sustainable healthcare. Clayton (VIC): Australian Integrative Medicine Association, 2004: 50–64Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bensoussan A, Lewith GT. Complementary medicine research in Australia: a strategy for the future. Med J Aust 2004; 181(6): 331–3PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Royal Australian College of General Practitioners and the Australasian Integrative Medicine Association (RACGP-AIMA). Joint position statement on comple mentary medicine — June 2005 [online]. Available from URL: [Accessed 2006 Jan 4]
  14. 14.
    The Senate Community Affairs References Committee. The cancer journey: in forming choice: report on the inquiry into services and treatment options for persons with cancer [online]. Available from URL: [Accessed 2006 Jan 4]
  15. 15.
    NSW Medical Board complementary healthcare policy [online]. Available from URL: [Accessed 2006 Jan 4]
  16. 16.
    Cohen M. Towards the evidence based integration of complementary medicines into hospitals settings. Evid Based Integrative Med 2005; 1(4): 241–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cohen M. CAM practitioners and “regular” doctors: is integration possible? Med J Aust 2004; 180(12): 645–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Expert Committee on Complementary Medicines in the Australian Health System. Report to the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health and Ageing, September 2003 [online]. Available from URL: [Accessed 2006 Jan 4]

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Health SciencesRMIT UniversityBundooraAustralia

Personalised recommendations