The paradox of non-evidence based, publicly funded complementary alternative medicine in the English National Health Service: An explanation

Where does residents' choice of primary medical treatment come from?-A logical analysis based on the perspective of service accessibility and residents' cognition

The uneven distribution of medical and health resources leads to changes in the choice of patients for medical treatment, which is the key to restrict the reform of medical services in China currently. Taking service accessibility and residents' cognition as the starting point, this study utilized the data from the questionnaire and applied logistic regression and mediation test. By taking service accessibility as an explanatory variable and residents' cognition as an intermediary variable, the study examined the differences between residents' choice of medical treatment at the primary and non-primary levels. Thus, the influencing factors of residents' choice of medical treatment at the primary level were explored. The research statistics came from questionnaires of 1,589 residents in Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, China. The results showed that service accessibility and residents' cognition were significantly correlated with the residents' choice of primary medical treatment. Household registration, age, the signing situation with family doctors, hospital service fees, and distance to the hospital were positively related to residents' choice of primary medical treatment; while the reputation, scale, residents' income, and the reimbursement ratio of residents' medical insurance were negatively correlated with the choice. In addition, residents' cognition played an intermediary effect between service accessibility and the residents' choice of primary medical treatment. The signing situation with family doctors indirectly affected the choice of primary medical treatment through residents' cognition, and residents' cognition masked some negative influence of the reimbursement ratio of residents' medical insurance on the choice of primary medical treatment.

Skill mix: The potential for personal assistants to undertake health-related tasks for people with personal health budgets

Personal health budgets (PHBs) are being promoted in England as expanding the benefits of choice and control to individuals with healthcare needs. National Health Service (NHS) money is provided to eligible people to use as set out in approved care plans, including direct employment of personal assistants (PAs). The government plans to increase NHS-funded PHBs and to further introduce integrated personal budgets (IPBs). This potentially creates more demand for directly employed or self-employed PAs with health-related skills. The objective of this paper is to report findings from interviews with PAs (n = 105) and key informants (n = 26) from across England, undertaken between October 2016 and August 2017, about the potential for the PA workforce to undertake 'health-related' tasks as facilitated by the introduction of PHBs. PAs were purposefully recruited to ensure the sample included participants from different geographical locations. Key informants were purposefully selected based on their knowledge of policy and community services. Data were analysed quantitatively and qualitatively. This paper focuses on reporting qualitative findings, which are set within the theoretical framework of normalisation process theory to explore implementation challenges of PHBs. The majority (64%) of PAs confirmed that they saw their current roles as congruent with PHBs, were willing to engage with PHBs and undertake health-related tasks. However, 74% of PAs said they would need additional training if enacting such roles. Key informant interviews appraised the development of PHBs as complex, noting incongruences arising from NHS and social care-funded PAs carrying out similar roles within different organisational systems. We conclude the current PA workforce is willing to take on PHB work and is likely to interweave this with work funded by PBs and self-funding care users. Implications include the need for careful consideration of training requirements and delivery for PHB-funded PAs.

The effectiveness of aromatherapy, massage and reflexology in people with palliative care needs: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Aromatherapy, massage and reflexology are widely used in palliative care. Despite this, there are questions about their suitability for inclusion in clinical guidelines. The need to understand their benefits is a public priority, especially in light of funding pressures.

AIM

To synthesise current evidence on the effectiveness of aromatherapy, massage and reflexology in people with palliative care needs.

DESIGN

A systematic review of randomised controlled trials (PROSPERO CRD42017081409) was undertaken following international standards including Cochrane guidelines. The quality of trials and their pooled evidence were appraised. Primary outcomes on effect were anxiety, pain and quality-of-life.

DATA SOURCES

Eight citation databases and three trial registries were searched to June 2018.

RESULTS

Twenty-two trials, involving 1956 participants were identified. Compared with a control, four evaluated aromatherapy, eight massage and six reflexology. A further four evaluated massage compared with aromatherapy. Trials were at an unclear risk of bias. Many had small samples. Heterogeneity prevented meta-analysis. In comparison with usual care, another therapy or an active control, evidence on the effectiveness of massage and aromatherapy in reducing anxiety, pain and improving quality-of-life was inconclusive. There was some evidence (low quality) that compared to an active control, reflexology reduced pain.

CONCLUSIONS

This review identified a relatively large number of trials, but with poor and heterogeneous evidence. New clinical recommendations cannot be made based on current evidence. To help provide more definitive trial findings, it may be useful first to understand more about the best way to measure the effectiveness of these therapies in palliative care.

The efficacy of complementary therapy for patients receiving palliative cancer care

Involving patients in their own care is associated with improved health outcomes. Complementary therapies are popular among patients and enable them to receive the palliative care they want and need. However, the range of complementary therapy services available to patients need to be evaluated for efficacy. This study evaluated the complementary therapy services offered at one cancer outpatient clinic in the UK, with the aim of evaluating the effect of complementary therapies on patient wellbeing and to systematise concerns and categories of wellbeing in order to improve service provision. A sample of 60 patients rated their feelings of wellbeing on a Likert scale before and after a series of six complementary therapies. They were also asked which concerns they had and, after treatment, were asked about factors that may influence their wellbeing. The data were analysed quantitatively by t-test and Wilcoxon signed ranks and the results show a statistically significant improvement in wellbeing. The concerns were assigned into super categories to aid service provision and the other factors that influence general wellbeing were assessed to categorise areas of patient needs that may be addressed in patient care. These results highlight important areas for investigation, which have implications for service provision in palliative cancer care.