Evaluation of How Integrative Oncology Services Are Valued between Hematology/Oncology Patients and Hematologists/Oncologists at a Tertiary Care Center

Evidence regarding opinions on integrative modalities by patients and physicians is lacking. Methods. A survey study was conducted assessing how integrative modalities were valued among hematology/oncology patients and hematologists and oncologists at a major tertiary medical center. Results. 1008 patients and 55 physicians were surveyed. With the exception of support groups, patients valued nutrition services, exercise therapy, spiritual/religious counseling, supplement/herbal advice, support groups, music therapy, and other complimentary medicine services significantly more than physicians (P ≤ 0.05). Conclusion. With the exception of support groups, patients value integrative modalities more than physicians. Perhaps with increasing education, awareness, and acceptance by providers and traditional institutions, integrative modalities could be equally valued between patients and providers. It is possible that increased availability and utilization of integrative oncology modalities at tertiary hospital sites could improve patient satisfaction, quality of life, and other clinical endpoints.

Choosing the pacemaker; a rational approach to the use of modern pacemaker technology

Sophisticated pacemakers now afford greater benefit than only relief of syncope for patients with symptomatic bradyarrhythmia. For clinical reasons it is inappropriate to implant ventricular demand (VVI) pacemakers in every patient, but for both clinical and economic reasons it is also undesirable to use dual-lead or rate-responsive systems indiscriminately. However, the published guidelines for pacemaker choice and investigation are inadequate. We have analysed the clinical assessment and the investigations required in a series of 150 patients with various electrophysiological disorders, considered consecutively for pacemaker implantation using an algorithm to assist decisions. Holter electrocardiography in 77.3%, exercise testing--formal (in 9.3%) or informal (during Holter electrocardiography), electrophysiology study (EPS)--full in 15.3% and partial in 29.3%, and trial of pacing (10.7%) were all used to characterize dysfunction and to define appropriate pacing mode. 142 patients were paced--57.0% with single lead modes (12.7%) AAI, 44.3% VVI) and 43.0% dual-lead (2.8% DVI, 23.9% VDD or VAT, 16.2% DDD). Three patients received rate-responsive systems (VVIR) which, if available, would have been used in nine; four would have been suitable for AAIR and four for dual-lead responsive pacing (DVIR, DDIR or DDDR). We offer a rational approach based on published data for investigation and pacemaker choice in the management of patients with bradyarrhythmia.