Evaluating Integrative Cancer Clinics With the Claim Assessment Profile: An Example With the InspireHealth Clinic

Protocol for a scoping review of traditional medicine research methods, methodologies, frameworks and strategies

Background

The World Health Organization (WHO) has called for the evidence-informed integration of traditional medicine (TM) into health systems. Research rigor requires a good "fit" between research designs and what is being studied. The expectation that TM research fully adheres to biomedical evidentiary norms potentially creates tensions, as TM paradigms have their own distinct features. A scoping review will be conducted to describe and characterize the research approaches used in TM and their paradigmatic alignment with the TM being studied.

Methods

This scoping review protocol was informed by Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methods. This protocol outlines an a priori conceptual framework, provisionally termed "paradigmatic alignment." The review will include all populations, TM types, research approaches (i.e., methods, methodologies, frameworks, strategies), cultural contexts, and health care settings. Up to 38 English and non-English language databases will be searched sequentially for both published and gray literature until reaching data saturation across relevant concepts and contexts. Analysis will begin deductively, using a pre-piloted data extraction template to describe the TM research approaches. A basic qualitative content analysis of a sample of evidence sources will explore how research approaches are applied or modified to align with the TM therapeutic paradigm, and the manner in which they co-exist, contrast, complement or align with established biomedical research approaches. The findings will be narrated and summarized in charting tables and figures. The review will be reported according to the PRISMA scoping review extension. Consultative engagement with knowledge users across all review stages is planned.

Discussion

Aligned with the principle of Two-Eyed Seeing (Etuaptmumk), wherein Indigenous/traditional and biomedical knowledges may equitably co-exist, this review promises to advance scholarly insights of critical value in an increasingly pluralistic, globalized world.Clinical trial registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/, identifier INPLASY2023110071.

Greater Well-Being in More Physically Active Cancer Patients Who Are Enrolled in Supportive Care Services

Background: Cancers are one of the leading causes of mortality worldwide. Cancer patients are increasingly seeking integrative care clinics to promote their health and well-being during and after treatment. Aim: To examine relationships between physical activity (PA) and quality of life (QoL) in a sample of cancer patients enrolling in integrative care in a supportive care clinic. Also, to explore circulating inflammatory biomarkers and heart rate variability (HRV) in relationship to PA and QoL. Methods: A cross-sectional design of adult patients who sought care in the InspireHealth clinic, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Patients with complete PA data (n = 118) answered psychosocial questionnaires, provided blood samples, and received HRV recordings before enrollment. Patients were stratified into “less” versus “more” active groups according to PA guidelines (150 minutes of moderate or 75 minutes of vigorous PA or an equivalent combination). Results: Breast (33.1%) and prostate (10.2%) cancers were the most prevalent primary diagnoses. Patients engaging in more PA reported better physical (U = 1265.5, P = .013), functional (U = 1306.5, P = .024), and general QoL (U = 1341, P = .039), less fatigue (U = 1268, P = .014), fewer physical cancer-related symptoms (U = 2.338, P = .021), and less general distress (U = 2.061, P = .021). Between PA groups, type of primary cancer diagnosis differed (χ² = 41.79, P = .014), while stages of cancer did not (χ² = 3.95, P = .412). Fewer patients reported depressed mood within the more active group (χ² = 6.131, P = .047). More active patients were also less likely to have ever used tobacco (χ² = 7.41, P = .025) and used fewer nutritional supplements (χ² = 39.74, P ≤ .001). An inflammatory biomarker index was negatively correlated with vigorous PA (r_s = −0.215, P = .022). Multivariable linear regression (R² = 0.71) revealed that age (β = 0.22; P = .001), fatigue (β = −0.43; P ≤ .001), anxiety (β = −0.14; P = .048), and social support (β = 0.38; P = .001) were significant correlates of QoL.

Integrative Oncology: International Perspectives

Interest in integrative oncology (IO) is growing globally. Patients with cancer are actively using traditional complementary and integrative medicine (TCIM) as part of their cancer and survivorship care. Published studies from around the world report increasing use of TCIM by people living with cancer. This article summarizes the presentations that took place during a symposium titled, "Integrative Oncology: International Perspectives" at the International Research Congress on Integrative Medicine and Health in Baltimore, 2018. The purpose of the presentations was to examine whether cancer services across a variety of geographical regions, including Australia, Canada, the United States, and the European Union, were actively responding to cancer survivors' demand for TCIM. The presenters highlighted utilization rates and both facilitators and barriers to the provision of IO services in their respective countries and regions. The audience discussion following the presentations drew out many noteworthy perspectives.

Claim Assessment Profile: A Method for Capturing Healthcare Evidence in the Scientific Evaluation and Review of Claims in Health Care (SEaRCH)

Background: Grounding health claims in an evidence base is essential for determining safety and effectiveness. However, it is not appropriate to evaluate all healthcare claims with the same methods. “Gold standard” randomized controlled trials may skip over important qualitative and observational data about use, benefits, side effects, and preferences, issues especially salient in research on complementary and integrative health (CIH) practices. This gap has prompted a move toward studying treatments in their naturalistic settings. In the 1990s, a program initiated under the National Institutes of Health was designed to provide an outreach to CIH practices for assessing the feasibility of conducting retrospective or prospective evaluations. The Claim Assessment Profile further develops this approach, within the framework of Samueli Institute's Scientific Evaluation and Review of Claims in Health Care (SEaRCH) method.

Methods/Design: The goals of a Claim Assessment Profile are to clarify the elements that constitute a practice, define key outcomes, and create an explanatory model of these impacts. The main objective is to determine readiness and capacity of a practice to engage in evaluation of effectiveness. This approach is informed by a variety of rapid assessment and stakeholder-driven methods. Site visits, structured qualitative interviews, surveys, and observational data on implementation provide descriptive data about the practice. Logic modeling defines inputs, processes, and outcome variables; Path modeling defines an analytic map to explore.

Discussion: The Claim Assessment Profile is a rapid assessment of the evaluability of a healthcare practice. The method was developed for use on CIH practices but has also been applied in resilience research and may be applied beyond the healthcare sector. Findings are meant to provide sufficient data to improve decision-making for stakeholders. This method provides an important first step for moving existing promising yet untested practices into comprehensive evaluation.