Abstract
Abstract
Background
This descriptive study provides the first examination of global naturopathic education, regulation and practice frameworks that have potential to constrain or assist professional formation and integration in global health systems. Despite increasing public use, a significant workforce, and World Health Organization calls for national policy development to support integration of services, existent frameworks as potential barriers to integration have not been examined.
Methods
This cross-sectional survey utilized purposive sampling of 65 naturopathic organisations (educational institutions, professional associations, and regulatory bodies) from 29 countries. Organizational representatives completed an on-line survey, conducted between Nov 2016 – Aug 2019. Frequencies and cross-tabulation statistics were analyzed using SPSSv.25. Qualitative responses were hand-coded and thematically analysed where appropriate.
Results
Sixty-five of 228 naturopathic organizations completed the survey (29% response rate) from 29 of 46 countries (63% country response rate). Most education programs (68%) were delivered via a national framework. Higher education qualifications (60%) predominated. Organizations influential in education were professional associations (75.4%), particularly where naturopathy was unregulated, and accreditation bodies (41.5%) and regulatory boards (33.8%) where regulated. Full access to controlled acts, and to health insurance rebates were more commonly reported where regulated. Attitude of decision-makers, opinions of other health professions and existing legislation were perceived to most impact regulation, which was globally heterogeneous.
Conclusion
Education and regulation of the naturopathic profession has significant heterogeneity, even in the face of global calls for consistent regulation that recognizes naturopathy as a medical system. Standards are highest and consistency more apparent in countries with regulatory frameworks.
Funder
University of Technology Sydney
Australian Govt Research Training Program
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Complementary and alternative medicine
Reference44 articles.
1. World Health Organization. Benchmarks for training in traditional/complementary and alternative medicine: Benchmarks for training in naturopathy. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2010.
2. World Naturopathic Federation Roots Committee. WNF white paper: naturopathic philosophies, principles and theories. Toronto: World Naturopathic Federation; 2017.
3. Steel A, et al. Overview of international naturopathic practice and patient characteristics: results from a cross-sectional study in 14 countries. BMC Complement Altern. Med. 2020;20:59.
4. Esmail N. Complementary and alternative medicine: Use and public attitudes 1997, 2006, 2016: Fraser Institute; 2017. Available from: http://www.fraserinstitute.org. ISBN: 978-0-88975-444-7.
5. Xue C, et al. Complementary and alternative medicine use in Australia: a national population-based survey. J Altern Complement Med. 2007;13(6):643–50.
Cited by
16 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献