Evaluating complementary and alternative therapy services in primary and community care settings: a review of 25 service evaluations.
OBJECTIVE
To review evaluations of primary and community care complementary therapy services. To explore the impact evaluation reports may have had on funding decisions taken by NHS commissioners.


METHODS
We collected 32 reports for 25 services, principally in England. Reports were analysed for content using the structure-process-outcome model. Modified BESTCAM guidelines, which came out of a Delphi consensus exercise rating the ability of reports to address commissioners' priorities, were used to address the second objective.


RESULTS
Most commonly, evaluators carried out data extraction of referral forms (10), costings of the service (9), patient satisfaction questionnaires (9) and patient health status questionnaires (8). Five service evaluations addressed NHS cost pressures, with another carrying out a cost effectiveness assessment with QALY.


CONCLUSIONS
Addressing commissioners' priorities (e.g. GP consultations rates, prescription rates, secondary care referrals) in complementary therapy service evaluations may bolster chances of securing funding, but are unlikely to be enough on their own.
Wye
Lesley
L
Department of Primary Health Care, Community Based Medicine, University of Bristol, Cotham House, Cotham Hill, Bristol BS6 6JL, UK. Lesley.Wye@bristol.ac.uk
Shaw
Alison
A
Sharp
Debbie
D
D035843:Biomedical Research / Q000191:economics / Q000458:organization & administration*; D003153:Community Health Services / Q000191:economics / Q000458:organization & administration*; D000529:Complementary Therapies / Q000191:economics / Q000458:organization & administration*; D006801:Humans; D011320:Primary Health Care / Q000191:economics / Q000458:organization & administration*; D013222:State Medicine; D006113:United Kingdom