Doctor-patient communication and cancer patients' choice of alternative therapies as supplement or alternative to conventional care

Patient-doctor interactions around alternative and complementary medicine in the context of oncology care in a Latin American country

OBJECTIVE

To characterize doctor-patient communication patterns around the use of complementary and alternative medicines (CAM) in the context of oncology care in Colombia.

METHODS

A qualitative study was conducted using snowball sampling until data saturation was reached. We included oncology specialists and cancer patients who were in active treatment. Semi-structured interviews were conducted following a guide designed for each group of participants. An analysis based on open coding was performed to identify thematic areas. The coherence of emerging categories was verified by contrasting the data set within the content of the participants' reports and existing literature.

RESULTS

In total, 10 oncologists and 16 cancer patients were included, representing diverse professional fields and cancer diagnoses, respectively. Communication patterns comprise themes regarding the beginning of the interaction (i.e., patient's anticipations), the patient-doctor relationship (i.e., confidence), the characteristics of the message (i.e., synthetic vs explanatory), the communication styles (i.e., confrontational vs conciliatory), and the closing of the interaction (i.e., continuity vs. end of communication). In addition, extrinsic factors influencing communication were found to be related to participants (i.e., knowledge, cultural background) and context (i.e., institutional procedures).

CONCLUSIONS

The low frequency of communication contrasts to the increasing use of CAM. Divergent perspectives between doctors and patients could limit shared decision-making on the use of CAM. Enhanced knowledge and education on CAM for both actors is fundamental to improve their interaction and to move away from paternalistic and confrontational communication, particularly in a world region with cultural backgrounds that influence the use of CAM.

Exploring primary care physician feedback following an integrative oncology consultation

OBJECTIVE

To explore responses from primary care physicians (PCPs) from an integrative physician (IP) consultation and recommended integrative oncology (IO) treatment program.

METHODS

Chemotherapy-treated patients were referred by their oncology healthcare professional to an IP, a physician dually trained in complementary medicine and supportive cancer care. The consultation summary and patient-centered IO treatment program was then sent to the patient's PCP, with PCP-to-IP responses analyzed qualitatively using ATLAS.Ti software for systematic coding and content analysis. Trial Registration Number NCT01860365 published May 22, 2013.

RESULTS

Of the 597 IP consultations conducted, 470 (78.7%) summaries were sent to patients' PCPs, with only 69 (14.7%) PCP-to-IP responses returned. PCPs were more likely to respond if the patient was Hebrew-speaking (78.3% vs. 65.1%, P = 0.032). Systematic coding identified four predominant themes among PCP narratives: addressing the patient's medical condition and leading QoL-related concerns; patient-centered reflections; available resources providing support and promoting resilience; and PCP attitudes to the IO treatment program.

CONCLUSION

PCP-IP communication can provide valuable insight into the patient's bio-psycho-social care, addressing the patient's health-belief model, emotional concerns, caregiver-related factors, preferences, and barriers to adherence to IO care.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Healthcare services should consider promoting IP-PCP communication in order to facilitate better patient outcomes from an IO treatment program.

The use of complementary and traditional medicine for the treatment of patients with COVID-19: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the use and effectiveness of non-pharmacological therapies as part of the treatment of COVID-19 and its complications, either combined or not with the usual treatment.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted between August and October 2021 using PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL and Web of Science databases. From a total of 204 articles identified, 33 were included in the final sample (15 clinical trials and 18 quasi-experimental studies). The methodological evaluation was carried out using STROBE and CONSORT guidelines.

RESULTS

There is a growing literature on the use of CAM for COVID-19. Most studies have shown positive findings, particularly for the use of TCM, other herbal therapies and acupuncture. Nevertheless, most studies were carried out in Asia and relied on quasi-experimental designs. The current evidence is available for physical outcomes (mortality rate, pneumonia resolution and other symptoms, negative PCR test, and hospitalization and ICU admissions) and for mental health outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Despite a positive role of CAM on COVID-19 outcomes, the evidence is still mostly based on quasi-experimental studies. More robust clinical trials are needed in order to generate better evidence in this area.

Health Communication Research Informs Inflammatory Bowel Disease Practice and Research: A Narrative Review

Background

In the absence of targeted empirical evidence on effective clinical communication in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), a broad overview of existing evidence on effective communication in healthcare and available recommendations for communication in telehealth is provided and mapped onto IBD research and practice.

Methods

A narrative literature review was conducted using Pubmed and Scopus databases and snowballing literature search.

Results

Evidence-based relationship building strategies include communicating emotions, acknowledging and addressing patients' hesitancy, and ensuring continued support. A particular recommendation regarding telehealth interaction is to avoid long stretches of talk. Effective informational strategies include facilitating and supporting information exchange and considering patients' preferences in decision-making. In teleconsultations, clinicians should ask direct questions about patients' emotional state, clarify their understanding of patients' concerns and check patients' understanding, address at least one patient-reported outcome when discussing the recommended treatment, and shorten the consultation where possible. Strategies for maximizing effective clinical communication in the spoken communicative mode include using infographics and simple language, and assessing adherence at the beginning of the consultation. For teleconsultations, clinicians are advised to allow patients to explain the reason for their call at the beginning of the teleconsultation, probe additional concerns early and before ending the teleconsultation, and be mindful of technical issues such as voice delays.

Conclusions

Use of question prompt lists, decision aids, micro-lessons, and communication training interventions for clinicians could be beneficial in IBD care. Further research into the implementation of such interventions as well as clinical communication concerns specific to IBD is warranted.

Clinical associations for traditional and complementary medicine use among norwegian cancer survivors in the seventh survey of the Tromsø study: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Cancer survivors are a diverse group with varying needs that are patient-, disease-, and/or treatment-specific. Cancer survivors have reported supplementing conventional anti-cancer treatment with Traditional and Complementary Medicine (T&CM). Although female cancer survivors are reported to have more severe anticancer adverse effects, little is known about the association between anticancer treatment and T&CM use among Norwegian cancer survivors. The aims of this study are therefore to investigate (1) associations between cancer diagnosis characteristics and T&CM utilization and (2) associations between anticancer treatment and T&CM utilization among cancer survivors in the seventh survey of the Tromsø study.

METHODS

Data was collected from the seventh survey of the Tromsø Study conducted in 2015-16 among all inhabitants of Tromsø municipality aged 40 and above (response rate 65%), where inhabitants received online and paper form questionnaires. Data from the data linkage to the Cancer Registry of Norway for cancer diagnosis characteristics was also used. The final study sample was made up of 1307 participants with a cancer diagnosis. Categorical variables were compared using Pearson's Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test while independent sample t-test was used to compare continuous variables.

RESULTS

The use of T&CM the preceding 12 months was reported by 31.2% of the participants with natural remedies as the most reported modality of T&CM (18.2%, n = 238), followed by self-help practices of meditation, yoga, qigong, or tai chi, which was reported by 8.7% (n = 114). Users of T&CM were significantly younger (p = .001) and more likely to be female (p < .001) than the non-users, with higher use of T&CM among female survivors with poor self-reported health and being 1-5 years post-diagnosis. Lower use of T&CM was found among female survivors who received a combination of surgery with hormone therapy and those who received a combination of surgery with hormone therapy and radiotherapy. Similar usage was seen in male survivors, but not at a significant level. For both male and female survivors, T&CM was most frequently used by those with only one cancer diagnosis (p = .046).

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that the profile of the Norwegian cancer survivor who uses T&M is slightly changing compared to previous findings. Additionally, compared to male survivors, more clinical factors are associated with use of T&CM among female cancer survivors. These results should serve as a reminder to conventional health care providers to discuss the use of T&CM with patients across the entire cancer survivorship continuum to promote safe use, especially among female survivors.

A Qualitative Study Among Healthcare Providers on Risks Associated With the Use of Supportive Care for Cancer Treatment-Related Symptoms in Children and Adolescents

INTRODUCTION

Although more than 300 000 children and adolescents worldwide are diagnosed with cancer yearly, little research has been conducted investigating how healthcare providers consider risk and patient safety connected with supportive care (including complementary and alternative medicine [CAM]) in this age group. This study aimed to explore how different healthcare providers perceive and evaluate risk when patients combine supportive care and conventional medicine in clinical practice and how they communicate and inform parents about the use of these modalities.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with 22 healthcare providers with expertise in treating pediatric oncology patients from 5 countries. Systematic content analysis was conducted using Nvivo 1.61.

RESULTS

The analysis resulted in 3 themes and 8 subthemes. Generally, participants were cautious about implementing unproven new modalities or therapies when recommending supporting care modalities to parents of children and adolescents with cancer. The most important criterion when recommending a modality was evidence for safety based on a risk/benefit evaluation. Negative interactions with conventional medicine were avoided by using the half-life of a drug approach (the time it takes for the amount of a drug's active substance in the body to reduce by half). For patients with severe symptoms, less invasive modalities were used (ear seeds instead of ear needling). To enhance safety, participants practiced open and egalitarian communication with parents.

CONCLUSION

Healthcare providers reported using a variety of approaches to achieve a safe practice when parents wanted to combine supportive care and conventional cancer treatment. They emphasized that these modalities should be foremost safe and not become an extra burden for the patients. Providers highlighted patient-centered care to meet the individual's specific health needs and desired health outcomes. A lack of national and regional standardized training programs for supportive care in pediatric oncology was considered a hazard to patient safety.

Shared decision making: Does a decision aid support patients with an atypical cartilaginous tumor in making a decision about treatment

Objective

Due to new insights, atypical cartilaginous tumors (ACTs) of the long bones are no longer considered malignant and treatment is shifting from surgery to active surveillance. We developed a decision aid in order to support in shared decision making on treatment.The aim of this study is to evaluate the treatment preferences of patients with an ACT in the long bones.

Methods

During thirty-four months, patients received a decision aid digitally with information about the disease, the treatment options, and the risks and benefits of active surveillance and surgical treatment. The given answers to patients' preference questions were evaluated qualitatively in relation to the final choice of treatment.

Results

Eighty-four patients were included. None of the patients who preferred active surveillance later underwent surgery. Only four patients underwent surgery based on patient preference.

Conclusion

In our experience the decision aid is useful for shared decision making as it provides the patient with information and the clinician with insight into patient's preferences. The preference for treatment generally corresponds to the eventual treatment.

Innovation

When treatment changes, due to new insights, a decision aid seems helpful for both patients and clinicians to discuss the treatment that best suits the patient's situation.

Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine in the context of cancer; prevalence, reasons for use, disclosure, information received, risks and benefits reported by people with cancer in Norway

BACKGROUND

Research exploring the use of specific Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) modalities by Norwegian cancer patients is sparse. The aims of this study were therefor to map the different CAM modalities cancer patients use and further investigate their rationale for use, communication about use, self-reported benefits and harms, and their sources of information about the different modalities.

METHODS

In cooperation with the Norwegian Cancer Society (NCS), we conducted an online cross-sectional study among members of their user panel with present or previously cancer (n = 706). The study was carried out in September/October 2021 using a modified cancer-specific version of the International Questionnaire to Measure Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (I-CAM-Q). In total, 468 members, 315 women and 153 men, agreed to participate resulting in a response rate of 67.2%. The study was reported in accordance with the National Research Center in Complementary and Alternative Medicine's (NAFKAM) model of reporting CAM use.

RESULTS

A large proportion of the participants (79%, n = 346) had used some form of CAM with a mean of 3.8 modalities each (range 1-17); 33% (n = 143) had seen a CAM provider, 52% (n = 230) had used natural remedies, while 58% (n = 253) had used self-help practices. Most of the participants used CAM to increase their quality of life, cope with the cancer disease or for relaxation/well-being (64%-94%), mostly with high satisfaction and low rates of adverse effects. Few used CAM to treat cancer or prevent it from spreading (16%, n = 55). The main information sources were health care providers (47%), the internet (47%), and family and friends (39%). More than half (59%) of the cancer patients discussed their use of at least one CAM modality with a physician.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this survey will provide health professionals with more in-depth insight into the patterns of CAM use by cancer patients and facilitate better-informed discussions with their patients. Considering the high use of CAM, reliable information provision supporting cancer care providers' knowledge and health literacy among patients as well as good communication are crucial. The cooperation between the NCS and NAFKAM provides an example of how to address these issues.

Addressing Complementary and Alternative Medicine Use Among Individuals With Cancer: an Integrative Review and Clinical Practice Guideline

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use is common among individuals with cancer, but many choose not to discuss CAM with healthcare providers (HCPs). Moreover, there is variability in the provision of evidence-informed decision making about CAM use. A clinical practice guideline was developed to standardize how oncology HCPs address CAM use as well as to inform how individuals with cancer can be supported in making evidence-informed decisions about CAM. An integrative review of the literature, from inception to December 31st, 2018, was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO, CINAHL, and AMED databases. Eligible articles included oncology HCPs' practice related to discussing, assessing, documenting, providing decision support, or offering information about CAM. Two authors independently searched the literature and selected articles were summarised. Recommendations for clinical practice were formulated from the appraised evidence and clinical experiences of the research team. An expert panel reviewed the guideline for usability and appropriateness and recommendations were finalised. The majority of the 30 studies eligible for inclusion were either observational or qualitative, with only three being reviews and three being experimental. From the literature, seven practice recommendations were formulated for oncology HCPs regarding how to address CAM use by individuals with cancer, including communicating, assessing, educating, decision-coaching, documenting, active monitoring, and adverse event reporting. It is imperative for safe and comprehensive care that oncology HCPs address CAM use as part of standard practice. This clinical practice guideline offers directions on how to support evidence-informed decision making about CAM among individuals with cancer.

Communication and information needs about complementary and alternative medicine: a qualitative study of parents of children with cancer

BACKGROUND

Many parents choose support such as Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) for themselves and their children who have cancer. The aim of this paper is to describe, how parents who have children with cancer communicated with conventional health care providers about CAM, and what types and sources of information they would like to receive about CAM when the child was ill.

METHOD

This focused ethnography draws from in-depth, semi-structured interviews conducted with 22 families in Norway with 24 adult participants (two couples), including two individuals who had had cancer themselves. Four domains were explored in the data analysis: the use of CAM, advice from laypeople about CAM, communication with conventional health care providers about CAM, and parents' information needs about CAM.

RESULTS

Many of the participants had personal experiences with CAM before the child received the cancer diagnosis. The health care providers did not raise the question about CAM in the consultations. However, when the parents raised the question, they were mostly met in a positive way. The participants did not receive any information about CAM at the hospital, which they would have appreciated. Instead, they received recommendations about CAM from laypersons, which were mostly rejected, as the advice was not in line with their health values/philosophy.

CONCLUSION

The reason participants did not disclose CAM use is that physicians did not ask them about it. However, positive communication about conventional treatment facilitated fruitful conversations about CAM. The participants wanted information about CAM from authoritative sources, primary from health care providers at the hospital and the Children's Cancer Society. They demand information about risks and benefits when using CAM as well as whether CAM can improve the immune system, fight the cancer, and improve the quality of life of the family. An evidence-based decision aid is warranted to enable health care providers and parents of children with cancer to make well-informed decisions about CAM.

Physician Attitudes and Perceptions of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM): A Multicentre Italian Study

Purpose: Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) interventions are widely used by patients with chronic disorders, including cancer, and may interact with cancer treatment. Physicians are often unaware of this, probably due to poor patient-physician communication on CAM. The purpose of this study was to evaluate physicians' knowledge, attitudes and practice patterns regarding CAM in a survey conducted in Italy. Methods: A questionnaire was administered to 438 physicians (11 Italian hospitals) who predominantly treat patients with chronic disease, to collect personal and professional data and information on attitudes toward CAM and its possible role in Conventional Medicine (CM). Results: Of the 438 participants, most were specialists in oncology (18%), internal medicine (17%), surgery (15%), and radiotherapy (11%). Most worked at university (44%) or research hospitals (31%). Forty-two percent of participants believed that CAM could have an integrative role within CM. Oncologists were the physicians who were best informed on CAM (58%). Physicians working at research institutes or university hospitals had a greater knowledge of CAM than those employed at general hospitals (p < 0.0001), and those who were also involved in research activity had a greater knowledge of CAM than those who were not (p < 0.003). Length of work experience was significantly related to CAM knowledge. Moreover, 55% of participants suggest CAM interventions to their patients and 44% discuss CAM with them. The best-known interventions were acupuncture, Aloe vera and high-dose vitamin C. Conclusion: CAM use by patients with chronic disease and/or cancer has become a topical issue for the scientific community and for physicians. Knowing the reasons that prompt these patients to use CAM and guiding them in their decisions would improve treatment and outcomes and also benefit healthcare systems. Our findings contribute to a greater understanding of CAM knowledge, attitudes, and practice among Italian physicians. Further research is needed to identify the more effective CAM treatments and to work toward an integrated healthcare model.

"Then I went to a hospital abroad": acknowledging implications of stakeholders' differing risk understandings related to use of complementary and alternative medicine in European health care contexts

Background

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is a rather novel issue within public healthcare and health policy-making. CAM use in Europe is widespread, patient-initiated, and patient-evaluated, and the regulation across countries has been evaluated as disharmonized. CAM users are left in an uncertain position, and patient safety may be threatened. How “risk” is understood by individuals in health policy-making and clinical encounters involving the use of CAM has not yet been much debated. The aim of this article is to explore and discuss the existence and possible consequences of differing risk understandings among stakeholders maneuvering in the complex landscape of CAM practice and CAM regulation contextualized by European public healthcare systems.

Methods

Qualitative data were derived from two studies on CAM in European healthcare contexts. Findings from the EU project CAMbrella on legislation and regulation of CAM were mixed with data from an interview study exploring risk understandings, communication, and decision-making among Scandinavian CAM users and their doctors. In a secondary content analysis, we constructed the case Sara as a typology to demonstrate important findings with regard to risk understandings and patient safety involving European citizens’ use of CAM in differing contexts.

Results

By combining and comparing individual and structural perspectives on risk and CAM use, we revealed underexplored gaps in risk understandings among individuals involved in European CAM regulation and legislation, and between CAM users and their medical doctors. This may cause health risks and uncertainties associated with CAM use and regulation. It may also negatively influence doctor-CAM user communication and CAM users’ trust in and use of public healthcare.

Conclusion

Acknowledging implications of stakeholders’ differing risk understandings related to CAM use and regulation may positively influence patient safety in European healthcare. Definitions of the concept of risk should include the factors uncertainty and subjectivity to grasp the full picture of possible risks associated with the use of CAM. To transform the findings of this study into practical settings, we introduce sets of questions relevant to operationalize the important question “What is risk?” in health policy-making, clinical encounters and risk research involving European patients’ use of CAM.

Attitudes and knowledge about direct and indirect risks among conventional and complementary health care providers in cancer care

Background

Many complementary therapies offer benefits for patients with cancer. Others may be risky for patients due to negative interactions with conventional treatment and adverse effects. Therefore, cancer patients need guidance from health care providers to assess complementary modalities appropriately to receive benefits and avoid harm.

Method

In a self-administered questionnaire-based cross-sectional study, we compared knowledge and attitudes of health care providers with no training in complementary modalities to that of health care providers with training in complementary modalities about the risks for patients who combine complementary modalities with conventional treatment in cancer care. The analysis was based on responses from 466 participants.

Results

The attitudes and knowledge about direct risk followed provider specialty. Ninety-four percent of the medical doctors, 93% of the nurses, and 87% of the providers with dual training, but 70% of the complementary therapists, believed that complementary modalities can cause adverse effects (p < 0.001). The majority of the medical doctors and nurses believed that it is risky to combine complementary and conventional cancer treatments (78% and 93%, respectively), compared to 58% of the providers with dual training and 43% of the complementary therapists (p < 0.001). Eighty-nine percent of the medical doctors and nurses believed that complementary modalities should be subjected to more scientific testing before being accepted by conventional health care providers, in contrast to 56% of the dually trained and 57% of the complementary therapists (p < 0.001). The majority of the medical doctors (61%) and nurses (55%) would have neither discouraged nor encouraged the use of complementary modalities if patients asked them for advice. Moreover, less than 1% of the complementary therapists would have discouraged the use of conventional cancer treatments. The study participants believed that the most important factor to recommend a complementary cancer modality to patients is evidence for safety.

Conclusion

The health care providers in this study believed that complementary modalities are associated with direct risk and can cause adverse effects, and that it is risky to combine conventional and complementary treatments due to potential harmful interactions.

Complementary Health Approaches: Overcoming Barriers to Open Communication During Cancer Therapy

BACKGROUND

Complementary health approaches (CHAs) have been widely used by patients with cancer for many reasons. However, some patients choose not to disclose their use of CHAs to their nurses, fearing that this use will be viewed as unacceptable. Nurses may be uncomfortable talking about CHAs because of a lack of evidence-based research on the subject.
.

OBJECTIVES

This article promotes ways in which nurses can overcome barriers to open communication about CHAs with patients during cancer therapy.
.

METHODS

The literature related to CHAs and communication was reviewed.
.

FINDINGS

To encourage open communication between nurses and patients regarding the use of CHAs, nurses need to be more knowledgeable about CHAs through training or by conducting research related to CHAs.

Complementary and conventional providers in cancer care: experience of communication with patients and steps to improve communication with other providers

Background

Effective interdisciplinary communication is important to achieve better quality in health care. The aims of this study were to compare conventional and complementary providers’ experience of communication about complementary therapies and conventional medicine with their cancer patients, and to investigate how they experience interdisciplinary communication and cooperation.

Method

This study analyzed data from a self-administrated questionnaire. A total of 606 different health care providers, from four counties in Norway, completed the questionnaire. The survey was developed to describe aspects of the communication pattern among oncology doctors, nurses, family physicians and complementary therapists (acupuncturists, massage therapists and reflexologists/zone-therapists). Between-group differences were analyzed using chi-square, ANOVA and Fisher’s exact tests. Significance level was defined as p < 0.05 without adjustment for multiple comparisons.

Result

Conventional providers and complementary therapists had different patterns of communication with their cancer patients regarding complementary therapies. While complementary therapists advised their patients to apply both complementary and conventional modalities, medical doctors were less supportive of their patients’ use of complementary therapies. Of conventional providers, nurses expressed more positive attitudes toward complementary therapies. Opportunities to improve communication between conventional and complementary providers were most strongly supported by complementary providers and nurses; medical doctors were less supportive of such attempts. A number of doctors showed lack of respect for complementary therapists, but asked for more research, guidelines for complementary modalities and training in conventional medicine for complementary therapists.

Conclusion

For better quality of care, greater communication about complementary therapy use is needed between cancer patients and their conventional and complementary providers. In addition, more communication between conventional and complementary providers is needed. Nurses may have a crucial role in facilitating communication, as they are positive toward complementary therapies and they have more direct communication with patients about their treatment preferences.

Epistemological challenges in contemporary Western healthcare systems exemplified by people's widespread use of complementary and alternative medicine

Modern Western public healthcare systems offer predominantly publicly subsidized healthcare traditionally based on biomedicine as the most important basis to cure persons who suffer from disorders of somatic or psychiatric nature. To which extent this epistemological position is suitable for this purpose is under scientific debate and challenged by some people's personal understandings of health and illness, their individual illness experiences and their decision-making. Current studies show decreasing levels of patient trust in Western public healthcare and a widespread patient-initiated use of complementary and alternative medicine which is often linked to unmet patient-defined healthcare needs. Patients'/complementary and alternative medicine users' understandings of their afflictions are often based on elements of biomedical knowledge as well as embodied and experience-based knowledge. We believe this points to the need for a phenomenologically and socially based understanding of health and illness. In this article, we analyze challenges in contemporary healthcare systems, exemplified by people's widespread use of complementary and alternative medicine and based on three ways of understanding and relating to unhealth: disease (the biomedical perspective), illness (the phenomenological perspective), and sickness (the social perspective). In public healthcare systems aiming at involving patients in treatment processes, acknowledging the coexistence of differing epistemologies may be of great importance to define and reach goals of treatment and compliance.

The use of CAM providers and psychiatric outpatient services in people with anxiety/depression: a cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

Depression has been identified as one of the most frequent predictors of CAM use. However, limited data exist about the use of CAM providers among people with anxiety/depression in Norway. The aim of this study was to investigate the use of CAM providers, and the use of CAM providers and psychiatric outpatient services in combination, among people with self-reported anxiety and/or depression.

METHODS

We used questionnaire data from 12,982 participants (30-87 years) in the cross-sectional sixth Tromsø Study (conducted in 2007-8). Eligible for analyses in our study were 1685 participants who reported suffering from anxiety and/or depression. By descriptive statistical methods, we estimated the use of CAM providers, psychiatric outpatient services, and the combination of these. By logistic regressions we studied the association between the use of these services and gender, age, income, education, and self-reported degree of anxiety/depression.

RESULTS

During the previous year, 17.8 % of people with anxiety/depression visited a CAM provider once or more, 11.8 % visited psychiatric outpatient services, and 2.5 % visited both. Men with anxiety/depression were less likely to visit CAM providers compared to women (odds ratio [OR] 0.40, confidence interval [CI] 0.30-0.55), whereas higher educated people were more likely to visit compared to the lowest educated (OR 1.47, CI 1.02-2.13). The use of CAM providers was not associated with the degree of anxiety/depression. For those who used both CAM providers and psychiatric specialist services during the previous year, severe anxiety/depression was strongly associated with use compared to moderate disease (OR 7.53, CI 2.75-20.65).

CONCLUSIONS

People with severe anxiety/depression seem to use CAM providers and psychiatric services additionally, whereas those with moderate disease seem to use these services more as alternative pathways. CAM provider treatment might be a substitute for conventional care, particularly in patients with moderate disease.

From the conventional to the alternative: exploring patients' pathways of cancer treatment and care

BACKGROUND

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use is widespread and on the increase among cancer patients. Most research to date has involved a cross-sectional snapshot of CAM use rather than an exploration into the longitudinal, nonlinear treatment trajectories that cancer patients develop. Our aim is to explore and describe different treatment and decision-making pathways that individuals develop after receipt of a diagnosis of either breast, colorectal, or prostate cancer.

METHODS

The study was part of a larger mixed-methods pilot project to explore the feasibility of conducting a five-year international study to assess cancer patients' treatment pathways, including health care use and the perceived impact of different patterns of use on health outcomes over the course of one year. The results presented in this paper are based on the analysis of personal interviews that were conducted over the course of 12 months with 30 participants.

RESULTS

Five pathways emerged from the data: passive conventional, self-directed conventional, cautious integrative, aggressive integrative, and aggressive alternative. Factors that shaped each pathway included health beliefs, decision-making role, illness characteristics, and the patient-practitioner relationship.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this examination of the longitudinal treatment and decision-making trajectory provide important information to support health care professionals in their quest for individualized, targeted support at each stage of the patient pathway.

Perception of risk and communication among conventional and complementary health care providers involving cancer patients' use of complementary therapies: a literature review

BACKGROUND

Communication between different health care providers (conventional and complementary) and cancer patients about their use of complementary therapies affects the health and safety of the patients. The aim of this study was to examine the qualitative research literature on the perception of and communication about the risk of complementary therapies between different health care providers and cancer patients.

METHODS

Systematic searches in six medical databases covering literature from 2000 to 2015 were performed. The studies were accessed according to the level of evidence and summarized into different risk situations. Qualitative content analysis was used to analyze the text data, and the codes were defined before and during the data analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine papers were included in the primary analysis and five main themes were identified and discussed. The main risk situations identified were 1. Differences in treatment concepts and philosophical values among complementary and conventional health care providers. 2. Adverse effects from complementary products and herbs due to their contamination/toxicity and interactions with conventional cancer treatment. 3. Health care physicians and oncologists find it difficult to recommend many complementary modalities due to the lack of scientific evidence for their effect. 4. Lack of knowledge and information about complementary and conventional cancer treatments among different health care providers.

CONCLUSION

The risk of consuming herbs and products containing high level of toxins is a considerable threat to patient safety (direct risk). At the same time, the lack of scientific evidence of effect for many complementary therapies and differences in treatment philosophy among complementary and conventional health care providers potentially hinder effective communication about these threats with mutual patients (indirect risk). As such, indirect risk may pose an additional risk to patients who want to combine complementary therapies with conventional treatment in cancer care. Health care providers who care for cancer patients should be aware of these risks.

"My cancer is not my deepest concern": life course disruption influencing patient pathways and health care needs among persons living with colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The concept of "patient pathways" in cancer care is most commonly understood as clinical pathways, operationalized as standardized packages of health care based on guidelines for the condition in question. In this understanding, patient pathways do not address multimorbidity or patient experiences and preferences. This study explored patient pathways understood as the individual and cultural life course, which includes both life and health events. The overall aim was to contribute to supportive and targeted cancer care.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Nine Norwegian patients recently diagnosed with rectal cancer Tumor-Node-Metastasis stage I-III participated in qualitative interviews, five times over 1 year. Five patients later participated in a workshop where they made illustrations of and discussed patient pathways.

RESULTS

Patient pathways including both health and life events were illustrated and described as complex and circular. Stress, anxiety, and depression caused by life events had significant disruptive effects and influenced patient-defined health care needs. The participants experienced the Norwegian public health service as focused on hospital-based standardized cancer care. They expressed unmet health care needs in terms of emotional and practical support in their everyday life with cancer, and some turned to complementary and alternative medicine.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that acknowledging life course disruption before cancer diagnosis may have significant relevance for understanding complex patient pathways and individual health care needs. Approaching patient pathways as individual and socially constructed may contribute important knowledge to support targeted cancer care.

Use of complementary and alternative medicine in patients with cancer or multiple sclerosis: possible public health implications

BACKGROUND

The use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) among Scandinavian patients with cancer or multiple sclerosis (MS) may be perceived as closely connected to their experiences from conventional care and thus contextualized by Scandinavian public healthcare systems. This study aimed at providing more insight into such patients' widespread, complex, self-initiated and unregulated use of CAM, analysed from a public health perspective.

METHODS

Twenty-nine qualitative in-depth interviews with 31 CAM users diagnosed with cancer or MS were conducted. Qualitative content analysis was used to interpret the data.

RESULTS

The participants were 'active patients' because they initiated their use of CAM and wanted to take part in decision-making and contribute to positive health outcomes. They moved in and out of CAM and public healthcare contexts as 'boundary walkers'. Experience-based knowledge such as bodily experiences as well as scientific knowledge was perceived as relevant sources of knowledge in decision-making. CAM treatments were in general perceived as safe and conventional treatments as being potentially risky.

CONCLUSION

Boundary walkers often challenge the understandings of illness behaviour, evidence and treatment traditionally incorporated in Scandinavian public healthcare systems. CAM may be perceived as a healthcare system that acknowledges experience-based knowledge and patient involvement in treatment processes. Patient-centeredness is an important goal in current European public health programmes, but is often not recognized by CAM users in clinical practice. Thus, studies of CAM users' healthcare needs and their strategies to meet them may provide crucial knowledge to future development of patient-centred public health and medical education programmes.

Mapping the risk perception and communication gap between different professions of healthcare providers in cancer care: a cross-sectional protocol

INTRODUCTION

Studies show that patients with cancer who use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) have a poorer survival prognosis than those who do not. It remains unclear whether this is due to a priori poorer prognosis that makes patients turn to CAM, or whether there is a factor associated with CAM use itself that influences the prognosis negatively. Healthcare providers should assist patients in safeguarding their treatment decision. However, the current non-communication between CAM and conventional providers leaves it up to the patients themselves to choose how to best integrate the two worlds of therapy. In this study, an interactive shared decision-making (SDM) tool will be developed to enable patients and health professionals to make safe health choices.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will delineate, compare and evaluate perception and clinical experience of communication of risk situations among oncology experts, general practitioners and CAM practitioners. To accomplish this, we will develop a pilot and implement a large-scale survey among the aforementioned health professionals in Norway. Guided by the survey results, we will develop a β-version of a shared decision-making tool for healthcare providers to use in guiding patients to make safe CAM decisions.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Participants must give their informed and written consent before inclusion. They will be informed about the opportunity to drop out from the study followed by deletion of all data registered. The study needs no approval from The Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics because all participants are healthcare professionals. Results from this study will be disseminated in peer-reviewed medical journals.

Continuity of GP care is associated with lower use of complementary and alternative medical providers: a population-based cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

Continuity of general practitioner (GP) care is associated with reduced use of emergency departments, hospitalisation, and outpatient specialist services. Evidence about the relationship between continuity and use of complementary and alternative medical (CAM) providers has so far been lacking. The aim of this study was to test the association between continuity of GP care and the use of CAM providers.

METHODS

We used questionnaire data from the sixth Tromsø Study, conducted in 2007-8. Using descriptive statistical methods, we estimated the proportion using a CAM provider among adults (30-87 years) who had visited a GP during the last 12 months. By means of logistic regressions, we studied the association between the duration of the GP-patient relationship and the use of CAM providers. Analyses were adjusted for the frequency of GP visits, gender, age, marital status, income, education, and self-rated health and other proxies for health care needs.

RESULTS

Of 9,743 eligible GP users, 85.1% had seen the same GP for more than two years, 83.7% among women and 86.9% among men. The probability of visiting a CAM provider was lower among those with a GP relationship of more than 2 years compared to those with a shorter GP relationship (odds ratio [OR] 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68-0.96). Other factors associated with CAM use were female gender, poor health, low age and high income. There was no association with education.

CONCLUSIONS

Continuity of GP care as measured by the duration of the GP-patient relationship was associated with lower use of CAM providers. Together with previous studies this suggests that continuity of GP care may contribute to health care delivery from fewer providers.

Exclusive use of alternative medicine as a positive choice: a qualitative study of treatment assumptions among people with multiple sclerosis in denmark

BACKGROUND

A survey of members of the Danish MS Society revealed that a minority of MS patients choose to forgo all types of conventional treatment and use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) exclusively. A qualitative follow-up study was performed to elucidate the choice of exclusive CAM use by exploring treatment assumptions among a group of exclusive CAM users.

METHODS

The study was based on a phenomenological approach. Semistructured in-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with 17 participants, using program theory as an analytical tool, and emerging themes were extracted from the data through meaning condensation.

RESULTS

Four themes characterized the participants' treatment assumptions: 1) conventional medicine contains chemical substances that affect the body in negative ways; 2) CAM treatments can strengthen the organism and make it more capable of resisting the impact of MS; 3) the patient's active participation is an important component of the healing process; 4) bodily sensations can be used to guide treatment selection.

CONCLUSIONS

Exclusive use of CAM by MS patients may reflect embracing CAM rather than a rejection of conventional medicine. Health-care practitioners, patient organizations, and health authorities within the MS field should be aware of possible changes in patients' attitudes toward both CAM and conventional treatment interventions.

Online information on complementary and alternative medicine for cancer patients: evidence-based recommendations

BACKGROUND

Many cancer patients use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). Most websites offering online information on CAM are not helpful for them.

METHODS

We extracted decisive elements for online information on CAM by analyzing the literature on the information needs of cancer patients and on counseling cancer patients on CAM.

RESULTS

Key issues for online information on CAM are the qualification of the authors, transparency and accountability of the information, description of the aims, a scientific approach, description of treatment alternatives, support for the patient-physician relationship, individualized information, a summary of the information, disclosure of funding, and the privacy policy.

CONCLUSIONS

The communicative challenge will be to convey information without destroying hope and motivation. We suggest that CAM topics should be integrated into broader information provided on cancer (etiology, conventional treatment). By also providing information for physicians, such a website could promote shared decision-making. Online information will gain the status of independent expert knowledge if provided by a well-known scientific organization as, e.g., a national cancer society.