A pre-post evaluation of oncology healthcare providers' knowledge, attitudes, and practices following the implementation of a complementary medicine practice guideline

Assessment of education in a community hospital on healthcare providers' knowledge of and attitudes toward medical marijuana

INTRODUCTION

Although medical marijuana usage continues to become more socially acceptable and is increasingly regarded as a legitimate treatment alternative for certain medical conditions such as cancer and epilepsy, stigma remains.

METHODS

This study examined whether offering an educational session addressing several key aspects of medical marijuana (e.g., pharmacology, legality) to healthcare providers in a community hospital setting improved knowledge about and/or altered attitudes toward marijuana use. This information was collected through administration of pre- and post-education session surveys. Multiple choice questions were utilized to assess knowledge of marijuana pharmacotherapy, pharmacodynamic interactions, and regulations, whereas descriptive analyses via Likert-scale questions determined attitudes toward medical marijuana. A secondary outcome entailed analysis of drug interactions with marijuana users via retrospective chart review.

RESULTS

A total of 43 healthcare providers participated in the study. There were statistically significant increases in healthcare provider knowledge post-education session across multiple occupations (physician, P < .01; nurse, P < .001; pharmacist, P < .01; and nurse technician, P < .05). A total of 72 patients (83%) who self-reported marijuana use for medical or recreational purposes had a potential drug-drug interaction with marijuana.

CONCLUSIONS

As both medical and recreational marijuana continue to become legalized across the United States, formal education surrounding marijuana use and laws becomes increasingly important for healthcare providers and can be highly effective in preventing misinformation.

Impact of the Integrative Oncology Scholars Program on Oncology Providers' Key Knowledge of Dietary Supplements and Antioxidants for Providing Evidence-based Oncology Care

Dietary supplements are commonly used among cancer survivors. Oncology providers rarely receive training about dietary supplements. We evaluated whether e-learning modules could improve oncology providers' dietary supplement knowledge. Oncology providers participated in the National Cancer Institute funded Integrative Oncology Scholars (IOS) program. We used posttest readiness assurance tests (RAT) to measure knowledge acquisition from modules. One cohort completed a pre and posttest RAT to assess change in knowledge. Multivariate linear regression models adjusted for gender, race, profession, and years in practice were used to determine if these characteristics were associated with posttest RAT performance and change in pre to posttest RAT scores. Scholars (N = 101) included 86% (N = 87) females; age 44 ± 10 years; 72% (N = 73) Non-Hispanic White; years in practice mean range 11-15 ± 10. There were 37 physicians, 11 physician assistants, 23 nurses, 21 social workers, 2 psychologists, 4 pharmacists, and 2 physical therapists. The posttest dietary supplement and antioxidant RAT scores for all Scholars were 67 ± 18% and 71 ± 14%. In adjusted models there were no significant associations between dietary supplement and antioxidant posttest RAT scores with Scholar characteristics. Change in RAT scores for dietary supplement and antioxidants were 25% ± 23 and 26% ± 27 (P < 0.0001). In adjusted models, there were no significant predictors of change in dietary supplement RATs. For antioxidant RATs, profession was associated with change in scores (P = 0.021). Improvement in Scholar's test scores demonstrate the IOS program can significantly increase oncology providers' knowledge of dietary supplements and antioxidants.

Effects of blended learning training for oncology physicians to advise their patients about complementary and integrative therapies: results from the multicenter cluster-randomized KOKON-KTO trial

BACKGROUND

Many oncology physicians are confronted with the topic of complementary and integrative medicine (CIM) by cancer patients. This study examined whether a blended learning (e-learning and a workshop) to train oncology physicians in providing advice on CIM therapies to their cancer patients, in addition to distributing an information leaflet about reputable CIM websites, had different effects on physician-reported outcomes in regard to consultations compared with only distributing the leaflet.

METHODS

In a multicenter, cluster-randomized trial, 48 oncology physicians were randomly allocated to an intervention group (CIM consultation and an information leaflet) or a control group (information leaflet only). After the training, the oncology physicians conducted 297 consultations with their cancer patients. Measurements were assessed at oncology physician, physician-patient-interaction (measured by external reviewers), and patient levels. This analysis focused on the physician outcomes of stress reaction and perceived consultation skill competency. In addition, qualitative interviews were conducted with a subsample of oncology physicians who experienced both, the intervention and control condition.

RESULTS

The oncology physicians in the intervention group showed a lower stress reaction in all measured dimensions after CIM consultations than those in the control group. There was no significant difference between oncology physicians in the intervention and control groups regarding the perceived consultation skill competency (overburden: intervention 1.4 [95% CI: 0.7;2.1]; control 2.1 [95% CI: 1.4;2.7], tension: 1.3 [95% CI: 0.7;2.0] vs. 1.9 [95% CI: 1.3;2.5], and discomfort with consultation situations: 1.0 [95% CI: 0.4;1.7]; vs. 1.7 [95% CI: 1.2;2.3]). The qualitative data showed that only providing the leaflet seemed impersonal to oncology physicians, while the training made them feel well prepared to conduct a full conversation about CIM and provide the information leaflet.

CONCLUSIONS

In our exploratory study providing structured CIM consultations showed positive effects on the perceived stress of oncology physicians, and the training was subjectively experienced as an approach that improved physician preparation for advising cancer patients about CIM, however no effects regarding perceived consultation skill competency were found.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial registration number of the KOKON-KTO study is DRKS00012704 in the German Clinical Trials Register (Date of registration: 28.08.2017).

Documentation of Complementary and Integrative Health Therapies in the Electronic Health Record: A Scoping Review

Introduction: Complementary and integrative health (CIH) therapies refers to massage therapy, acupuncture, aromatherapy, and guided imagery. These therapies have gained increased attention in recent years, particularly for their potential to help manage chronic pain and other conditions. National organizations not only recommend the use of CIH therapies but also the documentation of these therapies within electronic health records (EHRs). Yet, how CIH therapies are documented in the EHR is not well understood. The purpose of this scoping review of the literature was to examine and describe research that focused on CIH therapy clinical documentation in the EHR. Methods: The authors conducted a literature search using six electronic databases: Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus, Google Scholar, Embase, and PubMed. Predefined search terms included "informatics," "documentation," "complementary and integrative health therapies," "non-pharmacological approaches," and "electronic health records" using AND/OR statements. No restrictions were placed on publication date. The inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) Original peer-reviewed full article in English, (2) focus on CIH therapies, and (3) CIH therapy documentation practice used in the research. Results: The authors identified 1684 articles, of which 33 met the criteria for a full review. A majority of the studies were conducted in the United States (20) and hospitals (19). The most common study design was retrospective (9), and 26 studies used EHR data as a data source for analysis. Documentation practices varied widely across all studies, ranging from the feasibility of documenting integrative therapies (i.e., homeopathy) to create changes in the EHR to support documentation (i.e., flowsheet). Discussion: This scoping review identified varying EHR clinical documentation trends for CIH therapies. Pain was the most frequent reason for use of CIH therapies across all included studies and a broad range of CIH therapies were used. Data standards and templates were suggested as informatics methods to support CIH documentation. A systems approach is needed to enhance and support the current technology infrastructure that will enable consistent CIH therapy documentation in EHRs.

Folate, folic acid, and chemotherapy-induced toxicities: a systematic literature review

Folate metabolism is a target for various chemotherapeutic drugs. Folate and its synthetic variant folic acid are B-vitamins. To what extent these vitamins impact treatment tolerance in patients with cancer remains unclear. A systematic literature review was conducted on intake and status of folate and folic acid in relation to chemotherapy-induced toxicities in children and adults with cancer. A total of 6,231 publications were identified, of which 40 publications met the inclusion criteria. In 12 out of 22 studies focusing on antifolates, a deficient folate status and lower folate and folic acid intake were associated with a higher risk of toxicities. In 8 out of 14 studies focusing on fluoropyrimidine treatments, a higher folate status and intake were associated with a higher risk of toxicities. These findings might explain interindividual differences in treatment tolerance and highlight the importance of evaluating nutritional status in oncology care.

Use of Aromatherapy for Pediatric Surgical Patients

BACKGROUND

Children having surgery experience distress from a myriad of sources. Aromatherapy may present an opportunity to promote a healing environment and decrease distress for children following surgery.

AIM

Evidence regarding the use of aromatherapy with children is growing. The purpose of this project was to describe our implementation process, subsequent use of and response to aromatherapy for children undergoing surgery.

METHODS

This quality improvement project and subsequent retrospective chart review included all patients with documentation of aromatherapy use over an 8-month period. Data collection included demographic data, patient diagnosis, location, information about which oils were used, for which indications, and any outcome the nurse was able to observe (e.g., improved, no change, worsening of symptoms). A nurse-led workgroup developed and implemented a process for aromatherapy in a limited scope when discomfort, nausea/vomiting, nervousness, and sleep disturbances were reported . Charts of all patients with documented aromatherapy use were reviewed for indication/reason for use, oil, and patient response.

RESULTS

Results suggest a successful implementation process. Aromatherapy was used by 191 patients (aged 3-22 years). Upset stomach, discomfort, and nervousness were most frequently reported as leading to aromatherapy use. Lavender and peppermint were the most frequently used oils. Of those patients with documented responses, the majority reported improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

We were able to successfully implement a new aromatherapy program as an adjunct to care in children undergoing surgery. No adverse events were reported. Documentation is crucial to evaluating any new service.

How is complementary medicine discussed in oncology? Observing real-life communication between clinicians and patients with advanced cancer

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to examine the structure of communication about complementary medicine (CM) between patients with cancer and clinicians during oncology consultations.

METHODS

Previously, consultations between 29 clinicians and 80 patients with advanced cancer were recorded in six hospitals in the Netherlands. The present study considers a secondary analysis. References to CM during the consultation were coded using a self-developed observational coding scheme.

RESULTS

At least one reference to CM was observed in 35 out of 80 consultations (44 %), with a total of 73 references. In most cases, CM was initially referred to by patients. Clinicians often did not elaborate on the subject of CM. Relevant aspects related to CM (e.g., safety, effectiveness) were infrequently discussed. Both patients and clinicians showed predominantly neutral to positive attitudes towards CM.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that patients are still the main initiators of discussions about CM and the topic is not consistently discussed in daily oncology practice.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

If exploration of patients' interest in CM or its use became routine in oncology practice, it may relieve patients of the burden of introducing the topic, decrease potential risks of CM use and increase access to evidence-based CM for all patients with cancer.

"Part of the Conversation": A Qualitative Study of Oncology Healthcare Professionals' Experiences of Integrating Standardized Assessment and Documentation of Complementary Medicine

Introduction:

The use of complementary medicine (CM) among individuals with cancer is common, however, it is infrequently assessed or documented by oncology healthcare professionals (HCPs). A study implementing standardized assessment and documentation of CM was conducted at a provincial cancer agency. The purpose of this study was to understand the perspectives and experience of oncology HCPs who took part in the study, as well as withdrew, regarding the feasibility and the challenges associated with assessment and documentation of CM use.

Methods:

An interpretive descriptive study methodology was used. A total of 20 HCPs who participated, managed staff, or withdrew from the study were interviewed. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic, inductive analysis was used to code and analyse themes from the data.

Results:

Oncology HCPs who participated in the study felt that CM use was common among patients and recognized it went underreported and was poorly documented. Facilitating factors for the implementation of standardized assessment and documentation of CM use included having a standard assessment form, embedding assessment within existing screening processes, and leveraging self-report by patients. Barriers included limited time, perceived lack of knowledge regarding CM, hesitancy to engage patients in discussion about CM, and lack of institutional support and resources. Recommendations for future implementation included having explicit policies related to addressing CM at point-of-care, leveraging existing electronic patient reporting systems, including the electronic health record, and developing information resources and training for HCPs.

Conclusions:

With the high prevalence of CM use among individuals with cancer, oncology HCPs perceive addressing CM use to be feasible and an essential part of high-quality, person-centered cancer care. Institutional and professional challenges, however, must be overcome to support the assessment, documentation and discussion of CM in patient-HCP consultations.