Video: Knock on Wood| Webinar: ACR/CHEST ILD Guidelines in Practice
fa-facebookfa-linkedinfa-youtube-playfa-rss

An official publication of the ACR and the ARP serving rheumatologists and rheumatology professionals

  • Conditions
    • Axial Spondyloarthritis
    • Gout and Crystalline Arthritis
    • Myositis
    • Osteoarthritis and Bone Disorders
    • Pain Syndromes
    • Pediatric Conditions
    • Psoriatic Arthritis
    • Rheumatoid Arthritis
    • Sjögren’s Disease
    • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
    • Systemic Sclerosis
    • Vasculitis
    • Other Rheumatic Conditions
  • FocusRheum
    • ANCA-Associated Vasculitis
    • Axial Spondyloarthritis
    • Gout
    • Lupus Nephritis
    • Psoriatic Arthritis
    • Rheumatoid Arthritis
    • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
  • Guidance
    • Clinical Criteria/Guidelines
    • Ethics
    • Legal Updates
    • Legislation & Advocacy
    • Meeting Reports
      • ACR Convergence
      • Other ACR meetings
      • EULAR/Other
    • Research Rheum
  • Drug Updates
    • Analgesics
    • Biologics/DMARDs
  • Practice Support
    • Billing/Coding
    • EMRs
    • Facility
    • Insurance
    • QA/QI
    • Technology
    • Workforce
  • Opinion
    • Patient Perspective
    • Profiles
    • Rheuminations
      • Video
    • Speak Out Rheum
  • Career
    • ACR ExamRheum
    • Awards
    • Career Development
  • ACR
    • ACR Home
    • ACR Convergence
    • ACR Guidelines
    • Journals
      • ACR Open Rheumatology
      • Arthritis & Rheumatology
      • Arthritis Care & Research
    • From the College
    • Events/CME
    • President’s Perspective
  • Search

Letters: Criticism for Complementary and Alternative Medicine Therapies in Rheumatoid Arthritis

Maarten Boers, MSc, MD, PhD, and Chenchen Wang, MD, MSc  |  Issue: December 2013  |  December 1, 2013

Criticism for CAM

I usually read The Rheumatologist with pleasure, but September’s issue had an unpleasant surprise on the front page: the article “CAM & RA” featuring an overview of complementary therapies that may benefit patients with RA by Professor Wang of the Center for Integrative Medicine at Tufts University, and supported by the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine of the National Institutes of Health.

ad goes here:advert-1
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE

I think this article is misleading and does both physicians and patients a disservice. Its publication suggests that the ACR and ARHP promote services and therapies that are at best of uncertain benefit, at worst quackery, harmful, and usually costly.

The leader on p. 31 claims that the literature in the past two decades “has consistently recognized the potential therapeutic benefits of Tai Chi mind–body exercise for chronic conditions.” Apart from Tai Chi, the overview features acupuncture, Trypterygium Wilfordii Hook F, and Tibetan Five Nectar formula. For acupuncture, Dr. Wang reports her personal updated but unpublished review, concluding benefits are uncertain. For Tai Chi, she contrasts her positive pilot trial of 20 patients with a Cochrane review that only suggests it may confer some benefit for a decidedly noncore outcome, i.e., lower extremity range of motion, particularly the ankle joint. For Hook F, she reports a published trial in 35 patients that concluded the treatment was safe (no mention of efficacy) and again an unpublished trial that reports efficacy. For Tibetan nectar, the studies were of such poor quality that even Dr. Wang chose not to provide details. The reference list includes some familiar titles, but also periodicals of import such as BMC Complement Altern Med, Chin Acupunct Moxibustion, and Hunan Guiding J TCM.

ad goes here:advert-2
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE

The article concludes that, while evidence on complementary therapies on RA remains limited, some of these treatments warrant future exploration.

Even on the basis of this highly selective and unsystematic review, I beg to differ. Let’s spend our money on developments that have more potential than those that have had 3,000 years or more to prove their worth (and still haven’t). Although I realize that The Rheumatologist is not a scientific journal, I think its message should be in keeping with evidence-based medicine. An article on complementary medicine should appropriately weigh the overwhelming amount of evidence against meaningful efficacy of such therapies, and protect us from biased reports of promising, uncontrolled, and unpublished results.

Maarten Boers, MSc, MD, PhD
Professor of Clinical Epidemiology
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics
VU University Medical Center
Amsterdam, Netherlands

Criticism for CAM: Dr. Wang Responds

I appreciate the comments and welcome the opportunity to clarify the substance of my overview, titled: “CAM & RA: Acupuncture, mind–body therapy, and Chinese herb and Tibetan medicine may benefit patients with RA” (September 2013, p. 1).

All physicians understand the limits of current treatments for chronic pain and the potential value that nonpharmacological interventions may have.1 In addition to conventional medications, patients suffering from arthritis also seek other effective treatments for pain relief by means of complementary and alternative medicines (CAM) including mind–body practice, herbal remedies, acupuncture, and supplements. In fact, it is estimated that arthritis is among the top six conditions for CAM use.2 Therefore, the availability of complementary, alternative, and integrative health interventions is becoming a vital component of healthcare systems domestically and globally, and the need for such treatment options for chronic conditions such as RA is growing exponentially. To better inform clinicians of possible alternative medical treatments for our patients with RA, the objectives of this article were to: 1) Offer a conceptual overview of the current body of knowledge on CAM; and 2) Explore multidimensional approaches beyond pharmacological therapies to treat RA.

Concerning the question about whether “Wang’s personal updated but unpublished review” is truly evidence-based medicine and … “should appropriately weigh the overwhelming amount of evidence and protect us from biased reports of promising, uncontrolled, and unpublished results,” I acknowledge that several important published trials were omitted in this overview. They are now listed in the references below.3-8

Concerning skepticism about whether or not NIH efforts in CAM are vital and wisely invested, my response is the following. After a mere two decades of NCCAM efforts on CAM research, it remains a challenge for scientists to continue to evaluate over 3,000 years of clinical or research questions to prove the efficacy of CAM. These challenges include, but are not limited to: 1) current models of biomedicine that restrict CAM research; 2) the complex, confounding, and multivariable factors in CAM systems that require innovation to formulate rigorous, well-designed studies; 3) the compulsion to address critical unmet needs for novel yet effective CAM treatments for patients who struggle with the toxicity and increasing costs of medications; 4) the generation of critical insights into comparative clinical effectiveness research for providing optimal treatments for patients, especially over the long term.

Despite these challenges, we are poised for the start of a major paradigm shift in healthcare. This shift will inevitably tilt towards personalized medicine to optimize health and develop individualized therapy and self-management to combat disease, including RA.

My overview was, therefore, intended to push for and incite further exploration of the mysteries and complexities of the human body and mind in conjunction with CAM use for patients with chronic disabling conditions.

Chenchen Wang, MD, MSc
Center For Complementary and Integrative Medicine
Division of Rheumatology
Tufts University School of Medicine
Boston

References

  1. Briggs JP, Killen J. Perspectives on complementary and research. JAMA. 2013;310:691-692.
  2. Barnes P, Powell-Griner E, McFann K, Nahin R. Complementary and alternative medicine use among adults: United States, 2002. Adv Data. 2004;343:1-19.
  3. Wang C, Collet J, Lau J. The effect of Tai Chi on health outcomes in patients with chronic conditions: A systematic review. Archive Intern Med. 2004;164:493-501.
  4. Goldbach-Mansky R., Wilson M., Fleischmann R., et al. Comparison of Tripterygium wilfordii Hook F versus sulfasalazine in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: A randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151:229-240.
  5. Wang C, Schmid C, Kalish R, Yinh J, Rones R, Goldenberg D, McAlindon T. Tai Chi is effective in treating fibromyalgia: A randomized controlled trial. New Eng J Med. 2010;363:743-754.
  6. Wang C, DePablo P, Chen XY, et al. Acupuncture for pain relief in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A systematic review. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;59:1249-1256.
  7. Wang C. Tai Chi and rheumatic diseases. Rheum Dis Clin North Am. 2011;37:19-32.
  8. Wang C. Role of Tai Chi in the treatment of rheumatologic diseases. Curr Rheumatol Rep. 2012;14:598-603.

Page: 1 2 3 | Multi-Page
Share: 

Filed under:ConditionsRheumatoid Arthritis Tagged with:Alternative Medicinecomplementary medicineRheumatoid arthritisTherapies

Related Articles

    Is Acupuncture for Pain a Placebo Treatment?

    November 1, 2010

    An examination of the evidence

    Integration of Complementary & Conventional Care for Patients with Musculoskeletal Disorders

    May 8, 2023

    Studies related to acupuncture and tai chi show some benefits for patients with musculoskeletal disorders, such as fibromyalgia and osteoarthritis. When patients ask about these integrative health approaches, rheumatologists should recommend they use qualified, experienced practitioners.

    Complementary and Alternative Medicine Therapies May Benefit Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis

    September 1, 2013

    Acupuncture, mind-body therapy, and Chinese and Tibetan medicine may relieve pain and other symptoms of RA

    Tai Chi at Least as Good as Aerobic Exercise for Fibromyalgia

    March 31, 2018

    NEW YORK (Reuters Health)—Tai chi improves fibromyalgia symptoms at least as effectively as aerobic exercise, according to a new trial. Aerobic exercise is the most commonly recommended non-drug treatment for fibromyalgia, Dr. Chenchen Wang of Tufts University School of Medicine in Boston and her colleagues note in The BMJ, online March 12.1 ad goes here:advert-1ADVERTISEMENTSCROLL…

  • About Us
  • Meet the Editors
  • Issue Archives
  • Contribute
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us
fa-facebookfa-linkedinfa-youtube-playfa-rss
  • Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1931-3268 (print). ISSN 1931-3209 (online).
  • DEI Statement
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookie Preferences