Response to a proposal for an integrative medicine curriculum

BACKGROUND: A paper entitled "Core Competencies in Integrative Medicine for Medical School Curricula: A proposal," published in Academic Medicine, stimulated a broad discussion among complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) educators. This discussion led to a formal process for responding to the issues raised by the paper. METHODS: Representatives from the Academic Consortium for Complementary and Alternative Health Care (ACCAHC) and the Oregon Collaborative for Complementary and Integrative Medicine (OCCIM) formed the ACCAHC/OCCIM Task Force to participate in a Delphi process of consultation and deliberation. This process led to a broad, cross-discipline agreement on important points to include in a response to the integrative medicine (IM) curriculum proposal. RESULTS: Five key areas of concern emerged: (1) the definition of IM as presented in the paper; (2) lack of clarity about the goals of the proposed IM curriculum; (3) lack of recognition of the breadth of whole systems of health care; (4) omission of competencies related to collaboration between MDs and CAM professionals in patient care; and (5) omission of potential areas of partnership in IM education. CONCLUSIONS: A major overall theme emerging from the Delphi process was a desire for closer collaboration between conventional medical schools and CAM academic institutions in developing IM curricula. Several cross-disciplinary venues for addressing the Delphi Task Force themes include the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine's R-25 Initiatives, and the National Education Dialogue. OCCIM is presented as an example of a successful lateral integration approach.     

Rofecoxib: clinical pharmacology and clinical experience

BACKGROUND: Rofecoxib is a member of a subgroup of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) known as cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2)-selective inhibitors. It has been studied in adult and elderly patients in a number of painful conditions (primary dysmenorrhea, acute pain after dental and orthopedic surgery, osteoarthritis [OA], and rheumatoid arthritis). OBJECTIVE: This review discusses the clinical pharmacology of and clinical experience with rofecoxib, and the role of COX-2-selective inhibitors in clinical practice. METHODS: Pertinent studies were identified through searches of MEDLINE and EMBASE, as well as the Web sites and proceedings of relevant scientific meetings. RESULTS: Although the published literature is limited, the data indicate that rofecoxib is an effective analgesic agent for the painful conditions in which it has been studied. As a COX-2-selective inhibitor, rofecoxib offers safety advantages over traditional NSAIDs. In clinical trials, gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity, including mucosal damage, perforation, ulcers, and bleeding, occurred significantly less often in healthy volunteers and patients treated with rofecoxib than in those who received NSAIDs such as ibuprofen, naproxen, or diclofenac (all comparisons, P < 0.001). In terms of renal toxicity, rofecoxib does not appear to offer a safety advantage over traditional NSAIDs. Rofecoxib has not been shown to affect platelets (bleeding time and platelet aggregation), unlike traditional NSAIDs. CONCLUSIONS: Rofecoxib is an appropriate choice for patients who do not obtain adequate analgesia with acetaminophen and those who have not obtained adequate analgesia from, cannot tolerate, or are at risk for GI toxicity with traditional NSAIDs. Patients who require chronic analgesic medication (ie, those with OA), including those who take other medications daily for comorbid conditions, may also benefit from the once-daily dosing regimen of rofecoxib.     

A curricular divide: basic pharmacology vs. clinical pharmacology

Two current surveys of graduating medical students and/or recently graduated physicians from the United Kingdom raise significant concerns about the quality and quantity of clinical pharmacology instruction. Compared with the relative abundance of information about the instruction of basic pharmacology in US medical schools, little information exists about similar curricular content of clinical pharmacology. Here, we highlight this lack of information and encourage clinical pharmacology educators to address this curricular divide.     

The clinical response to brain death: a policy proposal

The ethical and scientific literature reflects a certain amount of controversy and confusion surrounding the concept of death by neurological criteria, or brain death. The issues surrounding brain death occur with limited frequency for those working in acute critical care settings. Even so, the literature and our own experiences evidence the discomfort of caregivers and policymakers when dealing with brain-dead patients and their family and loved ones. One particular area in which there seems to be significant diversity of opinion is what should occur when death by neurological criteria is pronounced. At some hospitals, when the patient is pronounced dead by neurological criteria, the support equipment is removed from the body immediately and the body is prepared for visitation by family or is transported to the morgue. In other hospitals, support equipment is maintained for a certain limited period to allow the family to be present when the equipment is ultimately removed. In general, however, it appears that institutional guidelines and policy are vague, at best, or often silent about the issue of when, how, and, to some extent, who decides what is done with the body. This policy paper discusses the confusion of care providers as well as lay persons related to the general concepts of death by neurological criteria. In addition, alternative approaches to the withdrawal of support equipment are examined. This article may also allow nursing administrators to better understand the importance of establishing specific clinical guidelines for their staff related to patients declared dead by neurological criteria. Our conclusion is that a universal policy should be adopted whereby all institutions develop the same guidelines concerning when and how treatment modalities should be withdrawn on their brain-dead patients. Such policy guidelines may not extinguish the misconceptions, misunderstandings, and discomforts that are present with a diagnosis of brain death, but it would certainly allow for more consistent actions on the part of the caregivers. Consistency would substantially benefit caregivers, families, and society alike.     

N-acetylcysteine for antioxidant therapy: pharmacology and clinical utility

Background: Glutathione is an endogenous antioxidant and has a ubiquitous role in many of the body's defences. Treatment with N-acetylcysteine (NAC) has been shown to increase levels of glutathione. NAC has been proposed as a treatment for several illnesses. Objectives: The efficacy and tolerability of NAC was examined across a range of conditions to evaluate the evidence supporting the use of NAC for each indication. Methods: A literature search was conducted using PubMed. Information was also collected from other online sources including the websites of the Therapeutic Goods Administration of Australia and the FDA. Results: Reports ranged from case studies to clinical trials. There is strong evidence to support the use of NAC for the treatment of paracetamol overdose and emerging evidence suggesting it has utility in psychiatric disorders, particularly schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. NAC is safe and well tolerated when administered orally but has documented risks with intravenous administration.     

Bivalirudin: a review of the pharmacology and clinical application

Among the current agents in the class of direct thrombin inhibitors, bivalirudin (Angiomax^®, The Medicines Company, NJ, USA) has seen increased use in cardiovascular medicine over the past decade through its primary indication as an anticoagulant used during percutaneous coronary interventions. Bivalirudin has been further investigated and used as the anticoagulation strategy in the setting of cardiac and endovascular surgical procedures and is frequently utilized in the management of patients with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. In comparison with heparin, bivalirudin exhibits a low immunogenic profile and provides similar or reduced major bleeding rates as well as a predictable degree of anticoagulation that is dose related. Bivalirudin primarily undergoes dual elimination via proteolytic cleavage and renal elimination, and requires dose adjustment in the setting of severe renal dysfunction. Given the body of supportive data, bivalirudin is likely to continue to figure prominently as a reliable and efficient anticoagulation strategy. Additional agents in the class of direct thrombin inhibitors are under investigation and may find increasing clinical use.     

Aripiprazole: a review of its pharmacology and clinical use

Atypical antipsychotics generally have a lower propensity for extrapyramidal side-effects (EPSE), hyperprolactinaemia and tardive dyskinesia than that associated with typical antipsychotics but may still produce troublesome side-effects, such as weight gain, cardiac rhythm changes and impaired glucose tolerance. Aripiprazole is a new atypical antipsychotic with a unique receptor binding profile that combines partial agonist activity at D2 and 5HT1A receptors with potent antagonism at 5HT2A receptors. Clinical studies in acute schizophrenic relapse, chronic schizophrenia and acute mania show it is robustly more effective than placebo. Once-daily aripiprazole 15-30 mg is as effective as haloperidol 10 mg/day and risperidone 6 mg/day in short-term treatment of schizophrenia and more effective than haloperidol 7-10 mg/day in maintenance of response in chronic schizophrenia. Aripiprazole appears to be well tolerated, with most studies suggesting a frequency of adverse effects similar to placebo. Aripiprazole seems not to cause significant EPSE, hyperprolactinaemia, excessive weight gain or cardiac rhythm disturbance. Limited data suggest that aripiprazole is not associated with impaired glucose tolerance.     

Bivalirudin: a review of the pharmacology and clinical application

Among the current agents in the class of direct thrombin inhibitors, bivalirudin (Angiomax(?), The Medicines Company, NJ, USA) has seen increased use in cardiovascular medicine over the past decade through its primary indication as an anticoagulant used during percutaneous coronary interventions. Bivalirudin has been further investigated and used as the anticoagulation strategy in the setting of cardiac and endovascular surgical procedures and is frequently utilized in the management of patients with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. In comparison with heparin, bivalirudin exhibits a low immunogenic profile and provides similar or reduced major bleeding rates as well as a predictable degree of anticoagulation that is dose related. Bivalirudin primarily undergoes dual elimination via proteolytic cleavage and renal elimination, and requires dose adjustment in the setting of severe renal dysfunction. Given the body of supportive data, bivalirudin is likely to continue to figure prominently as a reliable and efficient anticoagulation strategy. Additional agents in the class of direct thrombin inhibitors are under investigation and may find increasing clinical use.     

Pharmacoeconomics in pediatrics: A new task for clinical pharmacology

Background: Pediatrics must adopt its own set of practices for assessing the pharmacoeconomics of therapeutics to help those who care for children to provide high-quality, efficient care and allocate resources appropriately.Objective: This article reviews the use of pharmacoeconomic analysis in pediatric research.Discussion: The major components of pharmacoeconomic analysis in pediatrics include health economics; burden of illness; health-technology assessment; disease models; and research on health outcomes, delivery, and policy. In pharmacoeconomic assessments of pediatric health care, impact on health status and impact on health costs must be carefully balanced. Among the issues in pediatric pharmacoeconomics that remain unresolved are the value of such analysis, its use as an aid to decision making (rather than a substitute for judgment), and the need to appraise the quality of pharmacoeconomic studies.Conclusions: Pharmacoeconomic analysis and outcomes research are still experimental tools, especially in the field of pediatrics. However, when properly applied, pharmacoeconomic analysis is a useful addition to technical and value judgments for health care providers and policymakers.