What is the nature of research conducted on regulating traditional health practitioners? A scoping review

Abstract

Background Widespread use of traditional medicine (TM), the issue of their safety, combined with progressive lobbying from both practitioner groups and the public have made regulation of traditional health practitioners (THPs) an important issue. While there are questions on whether the regulation of THPs are worthwhile endeavour, literature continues to offer limited empirical evidence for clear answers. It is essential to synthesize the available literature in relation to this quest using a scoping study methodology. Methods This scoping review included publications from PubMed, Sabinet and Web of Science databases and included grey literature, primary research, journal reviews, published reports, as well as available policy articles. A methodological framework set out by Arksey and O’Malley was utilized. Results Out of 8040 searched publications, 25 met the criteria for full review. Regulation of THPs proved essential, but ways of regulating them showed many inconsistencies and challenges. The issues of recognition, integration, and colonization effects and the idea of viewing TM through a scientific lens dominated the themes arising from the 25 publications. Conclusion Evidence depicted that regulating THPs would be an arduous task, but the existing literature proved insufficient on the use of such regulations. However, the review calls for more studies looking at THP regulatory mechanisms, especially in developing countries, to learn best practices that embrace indigenous knowledges and promote a decolonized health system.