- Email: [email protected]
The future of reflexology [Complementary Therapies in Nursing and Midwifery, 8, pp. 84–90, 2002]
Complementary Therapies in Nursing & Midwifery (2003) 9, 98
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
The future of reflexology [Complementary Therapies in Nursing and Midwifery, 8, pp. 84–90, 2002] Dear Mrs Rankin-Box (Editor), Ann Lett raises a number of good points in her article regarding the future of reflexology (Lett 2002). She rightly states that informed consent should be elicited before any treatment is undertaken, and any deviation from this constitutes assault. It is important to remind people that regulations by many local authorities require the licensing of premises to be used for reflexology or other complementary and alternative medicine (CAMs) and that persons practising CAM need to be appropriately trained. Regulation, as she states, aims to protect the public from poorly trained therapists. The formation of the reflexology forum, as she states, is working towards uniting all forms of reflexology and providing some form of selfregulation. Lett provides a list of the scope and limitations of reflexology, including: helping the uterus to involute after birth, sparing catheterisation, reducing skin irritation, relieving pain and improving the functions of all systems6. These statements are not referenced and as such do not appear to have an evidence base to provide back up for their validity. The House of Lords report5 and the subsequent governmental response2 recommends that ‘specific claims for being able to treat specific conditions should have evidence of being able to do this above and beyond the placebo effect’, and that those working in CAM should have an understanding of evidence-based medicine. Having reviewed the published literature for a recent article8 we feel that these claims do not have a sufficient evidence base behind them. With the current drive for evidence-based practice, both in conventional medicine and the world of CAM, claims such as these do not help in the integration of the two forms of medicine; in fact, unsubstantiated claims may only serve to limit the integration of reflexology into traditional medicine. As with other CAMs the only way in which any integration can happen is
on the back of a sound body of evidence3,7 which as yet does not exist for reflexology1,4,8. The advertisement of anecdotal or unpublished claims has a danger of misleading the public. The reflexology profession has a duty to promote the production of good-quality research; we believe these claims are of benefit only to provide a stimulus and basis for further research. Yours Sincerely,
References 1. Botting D 1997. Review of literature on the effectiveness of reflexology. Complementary Therapies in Nursing and Midwifery 3: 123–130 2. Department of Health 2001. Government Response to the House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology’s Report on Complementary and Alternative Medicine. 3. Ernst E 1997. Evidence-based complementary medicine. Complementary Therapies in Nursing and Midwifery 3: 42–45 4. Ernst E, Koder K 1997. An overview of reflexology. European Journal of General Practice 3: 52–56 5. House of Lords 2000. Complementary and alternative therapies. House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology, 6th Report 1999–2000 [HL123] HMSO, London. 6. Lett A 2002. The future of reflexology. Complementary Therapies in Nursing and Midwifery 8: 84–90 7. Poole H 2002. Researching reflexology. In: Mackereth P, Tiran D, eds. Clinical reflexology – a guide for health professionals. Churchill Livingstone, London 8. Wilkinson I 2002 The House of Lords Select Committee for Science and Technology. Their report on complementary and alternative medicine and its implications for reflexology. Complementary Therapies in Nursing and Midwifery 8: 91–100
a
I. Wilkinsona 4th year Medical Student & reflexologist, 2 Exter Court 63, Devonshire Rd, Colliers Wood, London SW19 2EJ, UK
b
C.F.J. Rayner MD FRCPb Consultant Respiratory and General Physician, St George’s NHS Trust, London SW17 OQT, UK
1353-6117/03/$ - see front matter r 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/S1353-6117(03)00013-1
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
The future of reflexology [Complementary Therapies in Nursing and Midwifery, 8, pp. 84–90, 2002] Dear Mrs Rankin-Box (Editor), Ann Lett raises a number of good points in her article regarding the future of reflexology (Lett 2002). She rightly states that informed consent should be elicited before any treatment is undertaken, and any deviation from this constitutes assault. It is important to remind people that regulations by many local authorities require the licensing of premises to be used for reflexology or other complementary and alternative medicine (CAMs) and that persons practising CAM need to be appropriately trained. Regulation, as she states, aims to protect the public from poorly trained therapists. The formation of the reflexology forum, as she states, is working towards uniting all forms of reflexology and providing some form of selfregulation. Lett provides a list of the scope and limitations of reflexology, including: helping the uterus to involute after birth, sparing catheterisation, reducing skin irritation, relieving pain and improving the functions of all systems6. These statements are not referenced and as such do not appear to have an evidence base to provide back up for their validity. The House of Lords report5 and the subsequent governmental response2 recommends that ‘specific claims for being able to treat specific conditions should have evidence of being able to do this above and beyond the placebo effect’, and that those working in CAM should have an understanding of evidence-based medicine. Having reviewed the published literature for a recent article8 we feel that these claims do not have a sufficient evidence base behind them. With the current drive for evidence-based practice, both in conventional medicine and the world of CAM, claims such as these do not help in the integration of the two forms of medicine; in fact, unsubstantiated claims may only serve to limit the integration of reflexology into traditional medicine. As with other CAMs the only way in which any integration can happen is
on the back of a sound body of evidence3,7 which as yet does not exist for reflexology1,4,8. The advertisement of anecdotal or unpublished claims has a danger of misleading the public. The reflexology profession has a duty to promote the production of good-quality research; we believe these claims are of benefit only to provide a stimulus and basis for further research. Yours Sincerely,
References 1. Botting D 1997. Review of literature on the effectiveness of reflexology. Complementary Therapies in Nursing and Midwifery 3: 123–130 2. Department of Health 2001. Government Response to the House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology’s Report on Complementary and Alternative Medicine. 3. Ernst E 1997. Evidence-based complementary medicine. Complementary Therapies in Nursing and Midwifery 3: 42–45 4. Ernst E, Koder K 1997. An overview of reflexology. European Journal of General Practice 3: 52–56 5. House of Lords 2000. Complementary and alternative therapies. House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology, 6th Report 1999–2000 [HL123] HMSO, London. 6. Lett A 2002. The future of reflexology. Complementary Therapies in Nursing and Midwifery 8: 84–90 7. Poole H 2002. Researching reflexology. In: Mackereth P, Tiran D, eds. Clinical reflexology – a guide for health professionals. Churchill Livingstone, London 8. Wilkinson I 2002 The House of Lords Select Committee for Science and Technology. Their report on complementary and alternative medicine and its implications for reflexology. Complementary Therapies in Nursing and Midwifery 8: 91–100
a
I. Wilkinsona 4th year Medical Student & reflexologist, 2 Exter Court 63, Devonshire Rd, Colliers Wood, London SW19 2EJ, UK
b
C.F.J. Rayner MD FRCPb Consultant Respiratory and General Physician, St George’s NHS Trust, London SW17 OQT, UK
1353-6117/03/$ - see front matter r 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/S1353-6117(03)00013-1