An exploratory typology of provider responses that encourage and discourage conversation about complementary and integrative medicine during routine oncology visits

Counseling lifestyle medicine in oncology: A qualitative analysis of interprofessional patient-nurse-physician interactions

OBJECTIVES

Counseling plays a key role in promoting health behaviors, providing evidence-based information, and supporting patients with cancer during and after treatment. This study aimed to evaluate an interprofessional counseling service on Complementary and Integrative Health (CIH) for patients being treated at Comprehensive Cancer Centers (CCCs) in Southern Germany.

METHODS

Patients participating in the CCC-Integrativ study received three CIH counseling sessions within three months in addition to their conventional cancer treatment. Medical and nursing staff participated in a study-specific blended learning training program before conducting the counseling. As part of the process evaluation, 30 audio-recorded counseling sessions were transcribed verbatim and analyzed by conducting a content analysis using MAXQDA 2020.

RESULTS

Throughout the counseling, patients were conceded to address various health issues, which mainly revolved around symptom management interlaced with the areas of nutrition, exercise, and relaxation. The interprofessional teams conducted the counseling in a structured and patient-oriented manner. They worked together to motivate the patients to apply procedures from the CIH field independently, even if patients sometimes experienced difficulties in implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

Interprofessional collaboration improved healthcare quality, as patients received comprehensive and evidence-based advice on their supportive needs and lifestyle issues. Both professions could equally contribute their areas of knowledge and expertise and apply them to the benefit of the patients.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Providing an integrative counseling service and adequate training on interpersonal communication and CIH for healthcare professionals will improve patient-centered care.

Mapping Uncharted Terrain: A Systematic Review of Complementary and Integrative Health Communication Using Observational Data in Biomedical Settings

Complementary and integrative health (CIH) use is diverse and highly prevalent worldwide. Prior research of CIH communication in biomedical encounters address safety, efficacy, symptom management, and overall wellness. Observational methods are rarely used to study CIH communication and avoid recall bias, preserve ecological validity, and contextualize situated clinical communication. Following PRISMA guidelines, we systematically reviewed studies at the intersection of social scientific observational research and findings about CIH communication between clinicians, patients, and caregivers in biomedical settings. We identified international, peer-reviewed publications from seven databases between January 2010 and December 2020. Titles and abstracts were first screened for inclusion, then full studies were coded using explicit criteria. We used a standard checklist was modified to assess article quality. Ten of 11,793 studies examined CIH communication using observational methods for CIH communication in biomedical settings. Studies used a range of observational techniques, including participant and non-participant observation, which includes digital audio or video recordings. Results generated two broad sets of findings, one focused on methodological insights and another on CIH communication. Despite methodological and topic similarities, included studies addressed CIH communication as a process and as proximal and intermediate health outcomes. We recommend how observational studies of CIH communication can better highlight relationships between communication processes and health outcomes. Current research using observational methods offers an incomplete picture of CIH communication in biomedical settings. Future studies should standardize how observational techniques are reported to enhance consistency and comparability within and across biomedical settings to improve comparability.

Integrative oncology in cancer care - implementation factors: mixed-methods systematic review

BACKGROUND

Integrative oncology (IO) appears to be beneficial to patients with cancer, but its implementation remains a challenge. Guided by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and the Capability-Opportunity-Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) model, this systematic review identified the barriers to and facilitators of IO implementation in conventional cancer care settings.

METHODS

We searched eight electronic databases from their inception until February 2022 for qualitative, quantitative or mixed-methods empirical studies reporting the implementation outcomes for IO services. Critical appraisal approach was tailored according to study types. The identified implementation barriers and facilitators were mapped onto TDF domains and the COM-B model, and subsequently onto the behavioural change wheel (BCW) for formulating behavioural change interventions.

RESULTS

We included 28 studies (11 qualitative, 6 quantitative, 9 mixed-methods and 2 Delphi studies) of satisfied methodological quality. The main implementation barriers were the lack of IO knowledge, the absence of funding and healthcare professionals' low level of IO receptiveness. The key implementation facilitators were the dissemination of evidence on IO clinical benefits, the equipping of professionals with IO service delivery skills and the provision of a supportive organisational climate.

CONCLUSION

Multifaceted implementation strategies are needed to address the determinants influencing IO service delivery. Based on our BCW-based analysis of the included studies, the key behavioural change techniques are: (1) educating healthcare professionals about the value and application of traditional and complementary medicine; (2) ensuring access to actionable clinical evidence on IO effectiveness and safety and (3) designing guidelines on communicating traditional and complementary medicine interventions with patients and caregivers for biomedically trained doctors and nurses.

Communication Between Cancer Patients and Physicians About Complementary and Alternative Medicine: A Systematic Review

Objectives: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) has become increasingly popular among cancer patients and is often used concomitantly with standard cancer therapies. Nonetheless, disclosure of CAM utilization by cancer patients to physicians, along with the provision of information on CAM therapies by physicians, is poor. This review explores the literature to synthesize existing information on communication about CAM usage, reasons for nondisclosure, and the clinical implications thereof. Methods: A search of medical literature published between December 1, 2009, and October 1, 2021 (last searched on April 18, 2022), on communications between physicians and cancer patients about CAM treatments was conducted through MEDLINE and EMBASE. Results were screened for inclusion, dually reviewed, and assessed using the QualSyst quality appraisal instrument. Findings were categorized and synthesized for review. Results: A total of 30 articles were located (n = 8721 total participants), which discussed elements related to patient disclosure of CAM use (n = 16), provider experiences or perceptions related to communication about CAM (n = 3), patterns of this communication (n = 6), and recommendations for effectively discussing CAM with cancer patients (n = 5). Reports indicate that nondisclosure is common throughout the cancer care spectrum. Factors influencing nondisclosure range from patient beliefs and attitudes about their provider, demographic characteristics, disease progression, physician-patient relationship, physician noninquiry, and type of CAM used; ultimately creating a gap in care that may have serious medical implications. Discussion: Many of the studies identified are small and confined to a single-center, hospital-network, or geographic setting, thereby limiting the applicability of findings and recommendations. Nonetheless, improving patient-physician communication is essential in delivering evidence-informed, patient-centered care and crucial for achieving patient satisfaction and positive health outcomes. The lack of adequate CAM dialogue about CAM use increases the risk of adverse interactions with conventional cancer treatments and results in missed opportunities for providers and patients to engage in vital information exchange. Future research and education are necessary to further identify barriers surrounding patient-provider communication about CAM treatments.

Complementary and integrative healthcare communication in Chinese American patient / primary care visits: An observational discourse analysis

Objective

Chinese-American patients use CIH at high rates but disclosure of CIH use to clinicians is low. Further, the content of CIH talk between patients and their clinicians is not well described. We aimed to characterize CIH talk between Chinese-American patients and their primary care clinicians.

Methods

Discourse analysis of 70 audio-recordings of language concordant and discordant-interpreted visits.

Results

Nearly half of all visits (48.6%) had some form of CIH communication. 'Simple CIH talk' focused on a single CIH topic resulting in a positive, neutral, or negative response by clinicians. 'CIH-furthering talk' was characterized by clinicians and patients addressing more than one CIH topic or including a combination of orientations to CIH by both clinicians and patients. CIH-furthering talk characterized by clinician humility could enhance rapport, cultural understanding, and open communication. CIH-furthering talk also led to miscommunication and retreat toward biomedicine.

Conclusion

CIH communication occurred frequently during language concordant and discordant-interpreted visits with Chinese-American patients. Both patients and clinicians used CIH-furthering talk as a conversational resource for managing care.

Innovation

This discourse analysis of visits between Chinese-American patients and their clinicians advances understanding of CIH communication beyond disclosure, illustrating the complexity of linguistic and cultural nuances that affect patient care.

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.

A systematic review of communication about Complementary and Integrative Health (CIH) in global biomedical settings

OBJECTIVES

A systematic review to analyze communication rates of complementary and integrative health (CIH) and analyze how communication terms, such as "disclosure," are measured and operationalized.

METHODS

We searched seven databases for studies published between 2010 and 2018 with quantitative measurements of patients' communication of CIH to a biomedical clinician. We analyzed communication terms used to describe patients reporting CIH usage. We also examined the conceptual and operational definitions of CIH provided and whether those terms were explicitly operationalized. We aggregated the percentage, rate, or ratio of CIH users that communicated about CIH with their clinicians by disease type and geographical region.

RESULTS

7882 studies were screened and 89 included in the review. Studies used a wide range of conceptual and operational definitions for CIH, as well as 23 different terms to report communication related to reporting CIH usage. Usage varied by disease type and geographical region.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies of CIH and CIH communication may measure different kinds of social and communicative phenomena, which makes comparison across international studies challenging.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Future studies should employ standardized, replicable measures for defining CIH and for reporting CIH communication. Clinicians can incorporate questions about prior, current, and future CIH use during the medical visit.

Patient Communication of Chronic Pain in the Complementary and Alternative Medicine Therapeutic Relationship

Background:

Patient descriptions of pain shape the pain experience, yet there is insufficient understanding of how patient communication can help providers lessen pain’s psychological and physical impact.

Objective:

To examine how individuals communicate their pain experience in the complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) provider-patient relationship.

Method:

Qualitative thematic framing examining semistructured interviews of a purposive and snowball sample of CAM patients (N = 13; 850 double-spaced pages) recruited from the mid-Atlantic region of the United States.

Results:

Complementary and alternative medicine patients communicate the pain experience through an awareness of their interdependence with: (a) relational spaces as attention to the self, the healing practices, and the provider; (b) physical spaces as openness to surroundings and the spatiality and temporality of self; and (c) physiological spaces as breathing and neurological and immune system functioning.

Conclusion:

A therapeutic relationship cultivating interdependence through awareness of relational, physical, and physiological spaces supports patients’ ability to open up to, know, and accept their body. The CAM provider’s work connects their practice with patient awareness of control over their environment, relationships, and physiology to redefine their pain experience.

A Multicenter Comparison of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) Discussions in Oncology Care: The Role of Time, Patient-Centeredness, and Practice Context

BACKGROUND

Little is known about how complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is discussed in cancer care across varied settings in the U.S.

METHODS

In two practices affiliated with one academic medical center in southern California (SoCal), and one in the upper Midwest (UM), we audio-recorded patient-clinician interactions in medical oncology outpatient practices. We counted the frequency and duration of CAM-related conversations. We coded recordings using the Roter Interaction Analysis System. We used chi-square tests for bivariate analysis of categorical variables and generalized linear models for continuous variables to examine associations between dialogue characteristics, practice setting, and population characteristics with the occurrence of CAM discussion in each setting followed by multivariate models adjusting for clinician clustering.

RESULTS

Sixty-one clinicians and 529 patients participated. Sixty-two of 529 (12%) interactions included CAM discussions, with significantly more observed in the SoCal university practice than in the other settings. Visits that included CAM were on average 6 minutes longer, with CAM content lasting an average of 78 seconds. In bivariate tests of association, conversations containing CAM included more psychosocial statements from both clinicians and patients, higher patient-centeredness, more positive patient and clinician affect, and greater patient engagement. In a multivariable model including significant bivariate terms, conversations containing CAM were independently associated with higher patient-centeredness, slightly longer visits, and being at the SoCal university site.

CONCLUSION

The frequency of CAM-related discussion in oncology varied substantially across sites. Visits that included CAM discussion were longer and more patient centered.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The Institute of Medicine and the American Society of Clinical Oncology have called for more open discussions of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). But little is known about the role population characteristics and care contexts may play in the frequency and nature of those discussions. The present data characterizing actual conversations in practice complements a much larger literature based on patient and clinician self-report about CAM disclosure and use. It was found that CAM discussions in academic oncology visits varied significantly by practice context, that the majority were initiated by the patient, and that they may occur more when visit time exists for lifestyle, self-care, and psychosocial concerns.

Contending Worldviews in the Clinical Encounter: An Empirical Study of Complementary and Alternative Medicine Deliberations in Contemporary Medical Oncology

OBJECTIVE

In this article, the authors characterize the different ways patients and clinicians discuss complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) during routine cancer care.

METHODS

Over a period of two years, the authors audio-recorded clinical interactions between 37 medical oncology clinicians and a sample of 327 oncology patients at an academic cancer center in the Midwest United States. Recordings of conversations that included any discussion of CAM were transcribed and analyzed using a qualitative content analysis approach.

RESULTS

Out of 327 conversations, CAM was mentioned and/or discussed in only 31 encounters. Communication dynamics between clinician and patient involve several factors: the condition of the patient and his or her knowledge about and experience with CAM, the clinician's knowledge and values about CAM, perceived assumptions and stereotypes about CAM, and institutional response to the integration of CAM in cancer care.

CONCLUSION

Addressing the difficult and sensitive topic of CAM in cancer care requires hearing patients in a manner meaningful to them. In that sense, CAM can serve as an important marker and test case in the march toward shared decision-making and patient-centered communication generally.

Managing professional knowledge boundaries during ECHO telementoring consultations in two Veterans Affairs specialty care liver clinics: A theme-oriented discourse analysis

INTRODUCTION

Consultations are the traditional method of communication between generalist and specialist providers managing patients with specialty care needs. Traditional written consultations have limitations, including inadequate clinical information and inappropriate, or unclear consultation questions. Teleconsultations minimize these limitations through real-time communication between generalist and specialist providers to actively manage professional knowledge boundaries about specialty care problems.

METHODS

We video-recorded 37 teleconsultation sessions, resulting in 115 consultations between generalist and specialty care providers participating in Veterans Affairs (VA) Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) liver clinics. Data were collected at two US sites across nine months to observe consultation communication among 33 primary care generalists and three liver specialists. Video recordings were transcribed verbatim and analysed using theme-oriented discourse analysis to characterize consultation question content and format.

RESULTS

Generalists' consultation question content addressed a range of topics, including treatment, diagnosis, interpreting results, patient communication, screening and surveillance, and care coordination. Some generalists relied on descriptive narratives rather than a specific question to convey complex patient cases. Consultation question format showed nearly even division between targeting general medical knowledge and specialty care knowledge domains, including specialty care, medical, organizational, and experiential knowledge.

DISCUSSION

Timely access to specialists through teleconsultation has the potential to transform specialty care delivery. This article examines provider-to-provider interactions to understand how the communication process contributes to knowledge management during teleconsultations. Video studies of health information technology use provide a rich opportunity for analysing real-time communication that may help improve cross-specialty collaboration and the coordinated management of patients with specialty care needs.

"It's so hard taking pills when you don't know what they're for": a qualitative study of patients' medicine taking behaviours and conceptualisation of medicines in the context of rheumatoid arthritis

Background

Patients with chronic illnesses are often required to take lifelong medication to alleviate symptoms and prevent disease progression. Many patients find it difficult to adhere to prescribed medication for various reasons, some of which may link to the way they conceptualise medicines and understand their illness and treatment. This study explores the medicine taking behaviours of patients presenting with Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA), a chronic inflammatory autoimmune disease. We focused particularly on patients’ conceptualisation and understanding of medicines within this disease context, against a backdrop of scarce healthcare resources.

Methods

We conducted semi-structured interviews with 18 female patients at a rheumatology clinic in South Africa, as well as a review of participants’ medical records. We conducted a secondary analysis of the data using thematic analysis and framework analysis principles.

Results

Participants reported a range of medicine taking behaviours including self-medicating, adding complementary and alternative medicines (CAM) or traditional remedies, and sometimes acquiring prescribed medicines illegally. Participants provided insights into their understanding of what constitutes a medicine and what substances can be added to a prescribed regimen, which impacted on adherence. Importantly, the majority of participants demonstrated poor understanding of their illness, medications, regimens and dosage instructions.

Conclusions

Medicine taking in the context of RA, within the studied demographic, is complex and appears strongly mediated by individual and contextual factors. Poor patient understanding, individual conceptualisation of medicines and medicine taking, and the availability of a range of additional medicines and remedies impact on adherence. Based on these findings, we make some suggestions for how healthcare providers can play a greater role in educating patients living with RA about medicines, CAM and traditional remedies, as well as medicine taking behaviours.

The Importance Of Integrating Narrative Into Health Care Decision Making

When making health care decisions, patients and consumers use data but also gather stories from family and friends. When advising patients, clinicians consult the medical evidence but also use professional judgment. These stories and judgments, as well as other forms of narrative, shape decision making but remain poorly understood. Furthermore, qualitative research methods to examine narrative are rarely included in health science research. We illustrate how narratives shape decision making and explain why it is difficult but necessary to integrate qualitative research on narrative into the health sciences. We draw on social-scientific insights on rigorous qualitative research and our ongoing studies of decision making by patients with cancer, and we describe new tools and approaches that link qualitative research findings with the predominantly quantitative health science scholarship. Finally, we highlight the benefits of more fully integrating qualitative research and narrative analysis into the medical evidence base and into evidence-based medical practice.