[Differences and international standardization between acupuncture as therapy and as specialty]

Area of Science:

• Integrative Medicine
• Traditional Chinese Medicine
• Acupuncture Research

Background:

• Acupuncture's efficacy and safety are recognized, yet it faces credibility debates.
• A lack of clear definitions and international standards for acupuncture as a specialty exists.
• Objective comparison is crucial for acupuncture's specialization and internationalization.

Purpose of the Study:

• To explore differences in definition and clinical roles between acupuncture as therapy and as specialty.
• To analyze international standardization criteria for acupuncture as therapy and as specialty.
• To provide evidence for acupuncture's specialization and global integration.

Main Methods:

• Comparative analysis of definitions and clinical roles.
• Evaluation of international standardization criteria.
• Review of existing medical standards and evidence-based medicine principles.

Main Results:

• Identified disparities in the definition and application of acupuncture as therapy versus specialty.
• Highlighted the absence of unified international standards for acupuncture specialization.
• Proposed a framework for standardization based on safety, indications, and evidence levels.

Conclusions:

• Clear definitions and standardized criteria are vital for acupuncture's professional development.
• International medical standards and evidence-based medicine can guide acupuncture standardization.
• A structured approach to acupuncture indications is recommended for specialty recognition.