Basic Characteristics, Status, and Challenges of Integrative Oncology in China

Traditional and Complementary Medicine Use among Cancer Patients in Asian Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Globally, cancer patients frequently use T&CM during their treatment for various reasons. The primary concerns regarding the use of T&CM among cancer patients are the potential risks associated with interactions between pharmaceuticals and T&CM, as well as the risk of noncompliance with conventional cancer treatments. Despite the higher prevalence of T&CM use in Asia, driven by cultural, historical, and resource-related factors, no prior review has tried to estimate the prevalence and influencing factors of T&CM use and disclosure among cancer patients in this region. This study aims to examine the prevalence and disclosure rates of T&CM use among cancer patients in Asia to assess various factors influencing its use across different cancer treatment settings in Asia. Systematic research on T&CM use was conducted using four databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and CINAHAL) from inception to January 2023. Quality was assessed using the Appraisal Tool for Cross-Sectional Studies (AXIS). A random effects model was used to estimate the pooled prevalence of T&CM use, and data analysis was performed using Stata Version 16.0. Among the 4849 records retrieved, 41 eligible studies conducted in 14 Asian countries were included, involving a total of 14,976 participants. The pooled prevalence of T&CM use was 49.3%, ranging from 24.0% to 94.8%, and the disclosure rate of T&CM use was 38.2% (11.9% to 82.5%). The most commonly used T&CM modalities were herbal medicines and traditional medicine. Females were 22.0% more likely to use T&CM than males. A subgroup analysis revealed the highest prevalence of T&CM use was found in studies conducted in East Asia (62.4%) and those covered by both national and private insurance (55.8%). The disclosure rate of T&CM use to physicians remains low. Moreover, the factors influencing this disclosure are still insufficiently explored. Since the disclosure of T&CM use is a crucial indicator of patient safety and the quality of cancer treatment prognosis, future research should focus on identifying the determinants of non-disclosure.

Characteristics and Challenges of Providing Acupuncture and Chinese Herbal Medicine in Oncology Treatment: Report of Survey Data and Experience of Five Unique Clinical Settings

Acupuncture is an integrative therapy with strong evidence to support its use in the oncology setting, yet barriers exist for implementation into conventional medical clinics. Though acupuncture is recommended in clinical practice guidelines for oncology, there is little data in the literature showing how acupuncture and other related therapies, including herbal medicine are successfully implemented in some oncology clinics, while others experience barriers to care. To characterize the current use of acupuncture (ACU) and herbal medicine (HM) in oncology clinics, we collected general demographic and usage data from 5 example clinics. In addition, to better understand the barriers faced by ACU and HM clinics in implementing acupuncture as a treatment modality, a survey was deployed to 2320 members of the Society for Integrative Oncology. This article examines the characteristics of oncology settings around the world, and shares data from the survey on the use of these therapies in the field of oncology. The primary barrier to acupuncture care, as reported by providers, was cost. With just under 70% of the oncologists reporting it as the most important obstacle. Additional barriers to implementation included concerns about competency and training, accessibility and safety of herbal medicine during treatment. Though acupuncture is being incorporated into more conventional oncology settings, organized strategies for implementation involving payers and policymakers is needed.

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.